Let's not prettend that the first 300 directed by Zack Snyder is any kind of timeless cinematic masterpiece. It isn't but it is thoroughly entertaining over the top stylized entertainment. This movie however feels like an off brand copy that looks similar on the surface but is not quite there. Where Zack used slow-mo to paint pictures as if from the graphic novel, this movie just sticks them onto anything. Falling rope falling to the ground, walking, anything. Of course all the fights are in slow motion, hence the movie could have been about half the runtime if they'd displayed it in regular time. Though Zack Snyder himself is guilty of the same thing with his more current work. Back then it wasn't so stale yet. The overall effects are less polished. The blood splatters are very obviously put there in post and look horrible, funny even. I mean, the sheer number of them dictates that the CGI team couldn't have had enough time to make them look good. It really feels like a chinese copy of a product. It looks similar, but the execution is poor, the parts don't quite fit and that special spark from the original is missing. Pretty much just a waste of time. You do get to see Eva Greens boobas, but she looks much prettier in pretty much any other movie she's been in. Watch the original 300 instead of this. If you want a sequel, watch it 2x.
Reviews
143 Reviews
Night Hunter
(2018)
Pretty good, not great
17 May 2024
The Night Hunter is a thriller written, produced and directed by David Raymond, who based on IMDB has done one short before this movie. With modern big corporate movies I often criticize the unfocused bland products that the committees come up with. This movie lands on the other side of the bell curve of what I'd consider to be the optimal creative environment for a movie. What I mean by that is, that the Night Hunter is full of good ideas and the plot is pretty entertaining to follow, but the character work feels unfinished and the direction is bland.
If we break down the story, it is a thriller from the point of view of Henry Cavil, who is an Ex SWAT cop who is now working on murder cases. There are abductions of teen girls, a mentally challenged suspect is apprehended and you don't know if he is even the offender or if he has had help. If I were to summarize the whole plot including the ending, I think it sounds actually pretty good, but the execution isn't all there. The character development isn't completely fleshed out, plot threads are only touched upon but you never find out "why" and the direction/look of the movie is pretty basic. The tone of the subject matter would have profited from a more noir look, but instead we get basic camera point to action type of thing.
Henry Cavil starts out as a morose distant father and though there is an attempt to explain the reason for him being this way, it is told, not shown and doesn't quite come across. Hence Cavil's character just ends up being a sort of basic investigator character with absolutely nothing memorable. I don't even recall his movie name, and I've seen the movie yesterday.
Alexandra Dadario plays a sort of supporting character, but I could not tell you what exactly her role in the investigation or even the story structure was supposed to be. I guess she didn't know either. We get introduced to her as some sort of technician, but then acts as if she were a psychiatrist trying to crack the mind of the mentally challenged suspect.
The most memorable part of the movie was the suspect.
Overall, the twists and turns of the movie are good enough for an entertaining evening, though it weirdly feels like an adaptation of a better crime novel that had to be decimated and cut down to fit a given runtime. As far as I can tell, this was never a novel though so apparently it is possible to come up with this sort of crime thriller from scratch. If the script were revised 1-2 more times and if Mr. Raymond would have perhaps had help with the writing and direction the movie might have been a lot better. As it is the movie doesn't leave with catharsis, nor does it leave you with questions.
P. S. The movie is more likely to pull on your strings if you have a daughter. I do.
If we break down the story, it is a thriller from the point of view of Henry Cavil, who is an Ex SWAT cop who is now working on murder cases. There are abductions of teen girls, a mentally challenged suspect is apprehended and you don't know if he is even the offender or if he has had help. If I were to summarize the whole plot including the ending, I think it sounds actually pretty good, but the execution isn't all there. The character development isn't completely fleshed out, plot threads are only touched upon but you never find out "why" and the direction/look of the movie is pretty basic. The tone of the subject matter would have profited from a more noir look, but instead we get basic camera point to action type of thing.
Henry Cavil starts out as a morose distant father and though there is an attempt to explain the reason for him being this way, it is told, not shown and doesn't quite come across. Hence Cavil's character just ends up being a sort of basic investigator character with absolutely nothing memorable. I don't even recall his movie name, and I've seen the movie yesterday.
Alexandra Dadario plays a sort of supporting character, but I could not tell you what exactly her role in the investigation or even the story structure was supposed to be. I guess she didn't know either. We get introduced to her as some sort of technician, but then acts as if she were a psychiatrist trying to crack the mind of the mentally challenged suspect.
The most memorable part of the movie was the suspect.
Overall, the twists and turns of the movie are good enough for an entertaining evening, though it weirdly feels like an adaptation of a better crime novel that had to be decimated and cut down to fit a given runtime. As far as I can tell, this was never a novel though so apparently it is possible to come up with this sort of crime thriller from scratch. If the script were revised 1-2 more times and if Mr. Raymond would have perhaps had help with the writing and direction the movie might have been a lot better. As it is the movie doesn't leave with catharsis, nor does it leave you with questions.
P. S. The movie is more likely to pull on your strings if you have a daughter. I do.
Law Abiding Citizen
(2009)
Setup to be great, but isn't
10 May 2024
Warning: Spoilers
As much as I dislike leaving reviews with spoilers, I feel like I couldn't really discuss this movie without discussing the plot, thus spoiling it.
The movie starts off very strong in my opinion. Setup of a happy family, the crime, unjust punishment... all the parts are in place.
Based on this setup, I expected the movie to go a certain way, which it didn't. What it looked like, the left-over Father would get his revenge and then get out of jail because of similar technicalities that led to the release of the murder of his wife. Then he could have proceeded to punish the rest of the people he deemed responsible, leaving no evidence for the procurator. This could have been an awesome thriller, similar to prisoners, and this was what I expected based on the first 30 minutes of the movie.
Then, they reveal that the Father had been some sort of CIA killer or something of that sort, at which point the tone of the movie shifts and the contrivances start piling. At that point, I could no longer see the main character as 'The Father' . Honestly it isn't clear to me if he was meant to be this CIA killer all along, or if he started doing that after his family was murdered, but either version has IMO issues. It is not properly set up and feels very forced just so that the movie can go in the direction it ends up going, i.e. Members of the law enforcement team responsible for the initial verdict (about the murdered wife and child) get killed with gadgets that make various amounts of sense. For example, the mobile phone gun that kills the judge is beyond my suspension of disbelief, because the space in mobile phones is already packed to the max and if he had hidden a bullet in there, the weight and balance would change.
Watching the Spy Gadget Guy toy with the system is somewhat entertaining, but it makes the movie unfocused and all over the place. You start with Prisoners and then shift to Taken (sort of). What I don't understand is also, if this Spy Gadget Guy worked for the government, doing dirty work, why didn't anyone show up to 'take care' of the situation as soon as he laid hands on government officials? I feel like Gerard Butler is a sign of a movie having an intriguing and good premise, with somewhat of a disappointing execution. I still enjoyed watching the movie, though the impression it left is just sort of mid. It had the setup to be much better, but it isn't.
The movie starts off very strong in my opinion. Setup of a happy family, the crime, unjust punishment... all the parts are in place.
Based on this setup, I expected the movie to go a certain way, which it didn't. What it looked like, the left-over Father would get his revenge and then get out of jail because of similar technicalities that led to the release of the murder of his wife. Then he could have proceeded to punish the rest of the people he deemed responsible, leaving no evidence for the procurator. This could have been an awesome thriller, similar to prisoners, and this was what I expected based on the first 30 minutes of the movie.
Then, they reveal that the Father had been some sort of CIA killer or something of that sort, at which point the tone of the movie shifts and the contrivances start piling. At that point, I could no longer see the main character as 'The Father' . Honestly it isn't clear to me if he was meant to be this CIA killer all along, or if he started doing that after his family was murdered, but either version has IMO issues. It is not properly set up and feels very forced just so that the movie can go in the direction it ends up going, i.e. Members of the law enforcement team responsible for the initial verdict (about the murdered wife and child) get killed with gadgets that make various amounts of sense. For example, the mobile phone gun that kills the judge is beyond my suspension of disbelief, because the space in mobile phones is already packed to the max and if he had hidden a bullet in there, the weight and balance would change.
Watching the Spy Gadget Guy toy with the system is somewhat entertaining, but it makes the movie unfocused and all over the place. You start with Prisoners and then shift to Taken (sort of). What I don't understand is also, if this Spy Gadget Guy worked for the government, doing dirty work, why didn't anyone show up to 'take care' of the situation as soon as he laid hands on government officials? I feel like Gerard Butler is a sign of a movie having an intriguing and good premise, with somewhat of a disappointing execution. I still enjoyed watching the movie, though the impression it left is just sort of mid. It had the setup to be much better, but it isn't.
Beowulf & Grendel
(2005)
Nice production value, Slow plot
9 May 2024
I guess many might not agree with the title and call the movie cheap or bad looking, but I myself really enjoyed all the locations, sets and costumes that appeared onscreen. Given all the romanticized fantasy depictions of Vikings or migration era characters, this at least kind of looked somewhat believable. Well at least as far as I could tell. I am sure that reenactment nerds would complain about details, but at least the characters wear colorful capes, byrnies, the swords look somewhat believable and are worn on straps over the shoulder as they should be. There are also Helmets in this movie. Unbelievable!
What I am missing is the lack of shields and there is a nonsense double handed sword towards the end of the movie. Overall I was rather impressed with what I saw.
The problem of the movie is its pacing. The costumes and nice sets were enough to keep me satisfied for about 20 minutes, but the plot is somewhat slow and underdeveloped. Either the movie should have been much shorter, or they should have come up with a much more engaging plot. Mind you, my only frame of reference for the Beowulf story is the 2007 animated film, so I can't comment on how true this adaptation is. What I can tell you though is that its' entertainment value is somewhat lacking. There are only so many troll nighttime visits I could care about and so the movie starts to drag after about 30 minutes. It is a bit of a shame and a missed opportunity but still, I feel like if I ever come across this movie I'd gladly rewatch it again. To be honest, when I saw this movie I had flashbacks of scenes, so It might be possible that I'd seen it already? Just goes to tell you how forgettable the plot is.
I am sort of struggling on how to end this review. If you are reading this and haven't yet seen the movie, I'd say you are interested enough already to give it a go. There is plenty to like, but I guess plenty to dislike so you'll just have to try and give it a chance. I myself wouldn't pay to see this movie again, but If if were available with no better option, sure, I'd watch it.
What I am missing is the lack of shields and there is a nonsense double handed sword towards the end of the movie. Overall I was rather impressed with what I saw.
The problem of the movie is its pacing. The costumes and nice sets were enough to keep me satisfied for about 20 minutes, but the plot is somewhat slow and underdeveloped. Either the movie should have been much shorter, or they should have come up with a much more engaging plot. Mind you, my only frame of reference for the Beowulf story is the 2007 animated film, so I can't comment on how true this adaptation is. What I can tell you though is that its' entertainment value is somewhat lacking. There are only so many troll nighttime visits I could care about and so the movie starts to drag after about 30 minutes. It is a bit of a shame and a missed opportunity but still, I feel like if I ever come across this movie I'd gladly rewatch it again. To be honest, when I saw this movie I had flashbacks of scenes, so It might be possible that I'd seen it already? Just goes to tell you how forgettable the plot is.
I am sort of struggling on how to end this review. If you are reading this and haven't yet seen the movie, I'd say you are interested enough already to give it a go. There is plenty to like, but I guess plenty to dislike so you'll just have to try and give it a chance. I myself wouldn't pay to see this movie again, but If if were available with no better option, sure, I'd watch it.
Uncanny Deja Vu
29 April 2024
This movie might have helped me to understand what people mean, when they speak about Deja Vu. The concept is pretty weird to me and I rarely experience it, but rewatching this movie certainly was Deja Vu like.
I must have had it on a VHS as a small kid, probably more than 25 years ago and I don't think I have seen it since. I could not tell you how the plot would unfold, but scenes were familiar and I was reminded of feeling somewhat uneasy watching this movie. This must have been my first exposure to anime and even though It is aimed at kids, it is pretty scarry I guess. I don't even remember being scared by the big bad guy at the end, but rather little things. The trolls that combine into a single being that looks pretty uncanny, the general feeling of mischief that surrounds the clown character, the king being taken away by a black mass.
Seeing the movie as an adult, I can say the animation is excellent. The story is whimsical full of wonder. Overall the movie is very good, though I guess somewhere repressed deep inside I recall being generally scarred by this as a kid, so perhaps watch it with somewhat older kids.
I must have had it on a VHS as a small kid, probably more than 25 years ago and I don't think I have seen it since. I could not tell you how the plot would unfold, but scenes were familiar and I was reminded of feeling somewhat uneasy watching this movie. This must have been my first exposure to anime and even though It is aimed at kids, it is pretty scarry I guess. I don't even remember being scared by the big bad guy at the end, but rather little things. The trolls that combine into a single being that looks pretty uncanny, the general feeling of mischief that surrounds the clown character, the king being taken away by a black mass.
Seeing the movie as an adult, I can say the animation is excellent. The story is whimsical full of wonder. Overall the movie is very good, though I guess somewhere repressed deep inside I recall being generally scarred by this as a kid, so perhaps watch it with somewhat older kids.
The Matrix Resurrections
(I) (2021)
*audible groan*
29 April 2024
The premise of this movie might have worked, if anyone outside the producers actually wanted to make it. With the movie being so annoyingly meta and self-referential, as it is, there is even a scene where they discuss a sequel. In the case of the movie, the Matrix Trilogy were apparently games and at one point they discuss a sequel that the studio will produce with the original cast or without. I guess what they were going for was trying to get some sort of sympathy from the audience, since probably EVERYONE knew that a sequel was unnecessary and pointless.
What does the movie have to offer? As I already mentioned, there is a BUNCH of meta commentary, to the point of it becoming obnoxious. Furthermore, there is shameless nostalgia bait. Older familiar characters keep popping up and being referenced. The nostalgia references are actually so bad, that about what feels like 20% of the movie are actual clips of the original trilogy are sporadically cut into scenes.
There is a cast of new characters, but beyond their introduction (which might not actually have happened), they rarely actually use their names and so I would dare you to try and name as many as you could after your first viewing. Sure, there is the blue hair girl, that blond guy, some other background noise characters and the rest are actually characters from the trilogy that came back.
When it comes to the plot, the movie attempts to come up with some new convoluted concepts and further worldbuilding that doesn't feel like makes any real sense. Not in a way like you had to rewatch Matrix Reloaded 3-4 times to get what the architect was saying. There apparently was some kind of Machine v Machine war which hardly makes any sense when you'd think about it. The thing is though, this movie doesn't motivate me to rewatch it and try to make sense of it at all.
If the trailers made you feel like this was a shameless cash grab, then I'd say you were right. Try and save your money and watch it at some service that doesn't require you to pay to see it. Seeing the trailers, I couldn't help but think that even Keanu Reeves couldn't be bothered enough to lose his John Wick look for the movie, though that is not entirely true. In the 'Real World' he is shaven with short hair.
On it's own the movie would be a sort of forgettable sci-fi with a couple of good action scenes and some good ideas. However in the context of the Matrix franchise, it actually makes the previous entries worse. Seeing this trajectory I really hope they stop making future sequels, because each new entry keeps getting worst than the previous and I am running out of how low marks I can give.
What does the movie have to offer? As I already mentioned, there is a BUNCH of meta commentary, to the point of it becoming obnoxious. Furthermore, there is shameless nostalgia bait. Older familiar characters keep popping up and being referenced. The nostalgia references are actually so bad, that about what feels like 20% of the movie are actual clips of the original trilogy are sporadically cut into scenes.
There is a cast of new characters, but beyond their introduction (which might not actually have happened), they rarely actually use their names and so I would dare you to try and name as many as you could after your first viewing. Sure, there is the blue hair girl, that blond guy, some other background noise characters and the rest are actually characters from the trilogy that came back.
When it comes to the plot, the movie attempts to come up with some new convoluted concepts and further worldbuilding that doesn't feel like makes any real sense. Not in a way like you had to rewatch Matrix Reloaded 3-4 times to get what the architect was saying. There apparently was some kind of Machine v Machine war which hardly makes any sense when you'd think about it. The thing is though, this movie doesn't motivate me to rewatch it and try to make sense of it at all.
If the trailers made you feel like this was a shameless cash grab, then I'd say you were right. Try and save your money and watch it at some service that doesn't require you to pay to see it. Seeing the trailers, I couldn't help but think that even Keanu Reeves couldn't be bothered enough to lose his John Wick look for the movie, though that is not entirely true. In the 'Real World' he is shaven with short hair.
On it's own the movie would be a sort of forgettable sci-fi with a couple of good action scenes and some good ideas. However in the context of the Matrix franchise, it actually makes the previous entries worse. Seeing this trajectory I really hope they stop making future sequels, because each new entry keeps getting worst than the previous and I am running out of how low marks I can give.
Shōgun
(2024–2026)
Great, Adult, Beautiful
25 April 2024
I will mostly keep this review spoiler free and I will mark it as such, though it is impossible to talk about a 10 episode long mini series without at least hinting at things.
Shogun is the best series I have seen in a while now. It is masterfully shot, with great effects for a series. At times the series even got me thinking that it looks better than some big budget movies. The core of the series is about 2 things. One is the culture shock from the point of view of John Blackthorne, the second is the internal meddling and politics in Japan. The culture shock provides all of the comic relief and fun in the series, the meddling provides the intrigue, backstabbing and suspense.
I would call the series "adult". On the surface you could take that as there being nudity and gore, which there is. What I mean though, that there is a lot of things left unsaid. The series doesn't quite hold your hand and tell you everything outright. Though that leaves me somewhat unfulfilled after having finished the series, it is not really in a bad way. The conclusion feels as if two great chess players stood up from the table and walked away because they both realized the inevitable outcome, though to me, a casual viewer that is not quite clear. Even after getting an explanation that in 5 more moves that would lead to check mate, I feel a bit like I would have liked to seen those five moves. What that leads to, is me wanting to read the book and then rewatch the series to see if this time I could keep up with lord Toranaga. The ending would surely be more cathartic if all the cogwheels fell into place. I feel like the ending is dignified though and indeed fitting for the whole series. Through each episode I was entertained and so I can recommend it with no remorse.
A sidenote: I usually choose to watch dubbed versions of series, so my wife could enjoy it with me, but with this one it is somewhat pointless. If the English spoken parts were to be dubbed, that would still leave about 60-70% of the runtime in Japanese, hence subtitles. I didn't mind though, it really fits the setting. Just be prepared to read a bunch, unless you are fluent in both English and Japanese.
Shogun is the best series I have seen in a while now. It is masterfully shot, with great effects for a series. At times the series even got me thinking that it looks better than some big budget movies. The core of the series is about 2 things. One is the culture shock from the point of view of John Blackthorne, the second is the internal meddling and politics in Japan. The culture shock provides all of the comic relief and fun in the series, the meddling provides the intrigue, backstabbing and suspense.
I would call the series "adult". On the surface you could take that as there being nudity and gore, which there is. What I mean though, that there is a lot of things left unsaid. The series doesn't quite hold your hand and tell you everything outright. Though that leaves me somewhat unfulfilled after having finished the series, it is not really in a bad way. The conclusion feels as if two great chess players stood up from the table and walked away because they both realized the inevitable outcome, though to me, a casual viewer that is not quite clear. Even after getting an explanation that in 5 more moves that would lead to check mate, I feel a bit like I would have liked to seen those five moves. What that leads to, is me wanting to read the book and then rewatch the series to see if this time I could keep up with lord Toranaga. The ending would surely be more cathartic if all the cogwheels fell into place. I feel like the ending is dignified though and indeed fitting for the whole series. Through each episode I was entertained and so I can recommend it with no remorse.
A sidenote: I usually choose to watch dubbed versions of series, so my wife could enjoy it with me, but with this one it is somewhat pointless. If the English spoken parts were to be dubbed, that would still leave about 60-70% of the runtime in Japanese, hence subtitles. I didn't mind though, it really fits the setting. Just be prepared to read a bunch, unless you are fluent in both English and Japanese.
House of Gucci
(2021)
Horrible everyone
22 April 2024
I guess, like most people I never gave the Gucci brand and its' origins much thought, so a movie about their family is something I never really asked for. As such, I found the movie to be an entertaining experience, though nothing I feel compelled to recommend as something that needs be seen. The movie is well acted, well directed but slowly paced. It takes its time building up the characters, though the more I got to know them, the less I sympathized with anyone. That lead to a sort of indifference by the closing titles and I was pretty much glad that it ended already.
I won't go much into the plot because the interesting parts would be major spoiler, just rest assured that there is plenty of meddling and backstabbing.
I can't help but feel like the movie is aimed at people who'd already knew the major events and just want to see them unfold. The opening of the movie would have held much more weight if I knew how it would end, so either I wasn't the target audience, or that is a major misstep. If I wanted to discuss it further, my review couldn't bear the spoiler free tag.
Anyway, the movie felt way too long for what it was trying to tell us. If you ever need to kill 3 times, it is worth watching it at least once for the performances and direction but when it comes to Ridley Scott, this wouldn't probably qualify in the top 5, maybe even 10...
P. S. Jared Leto seems to be really enjoying himself in his role and watching him go with it is one of the highlights of the movie.
I won't go much into the plot because the interesting parts would be major spoiler, just rest assured that there is plenty of meddling and backstabbing.
I can't help but feel like the movie is aimed at people who'd already knew the major events and just want to see them unfold. The opening of the movie would have held much more weight if I knew how it would end, so either I wasn't the target audience, or that is a major misstep. If I wanted to discuss it further, my review couldn't bear the spoiler free tag.
Anyway, the movie felt way too long for what it was trying to tell us. If you ever need to kill 3 times, it is worth watching it at least once for the performances and direction but when it comes to Ridley Scott, this wouldn't probably qualify in the top 5, maybe even 10...
P. S. Jared Leto seems to be really enjoying himself in his role and watching him go with it is one of the highlights of the movie.
The Matrix Reloaded
(2003)
Action and Confusion, Diminishing returns
15 April 2024
With the first movie being as excellent as it is, the sequels had really big boots to fill. The first matrix was original (kind of, there were predecessors with similar ideas), it was ground breaking and revolutionary. I think it is pretty safe to say it was iconic. It had an open ending, and I think it should have remained that way.
I might be wrong, but the sequels don't feel like they were counted on from the start. It is a different feeling when you plan to make a trilogy or you make one successful movie and stick two follow-ups onto it. This feels as the later, and the sequels are diminishing in returns. While the plot of the first movie is in essence pretty understandable with nerdy programmer stuff sprinkled in there for us geeks, the sequels double down on the geeky stuff and action.
The plot of the sequel is about saving Zion from an immediate threat of a robot army. It is highly advisable to watch the Final Flight of Osiris from The Animatrix, to better keep up with the characters, though it is not essential or necessary. The plotline inside the Matrix is basically a fetchquest with the goal to somehow save Zion as well, and there is a Smith Situation on top of that.
No-one will fault you if you can't quite keep up. I have seen the trilogy multiple times, am somewhat of a geek, an engineer familiar with programming (though not a programmer by trade) and I am not entirely sure that I understand it completely. The sequels dive really deep into philosophical waters at times with way too much expository dialogue that requires multiple rewatches to fully grasp. These parts are a determent to entertainment and do not stick with you as much as the messages of the first movie did. To balance this, there is the action which is excellent, though not really better than the first film. As a kid, I just used to watch the Burly Brawl and then the whole sequence since they get the Keymaker towards the end of the highway chase. You have some fighting with weapons, shootouts, highway chase including on a motorcycle. Very entertaining stuff.
Let me get back to the object of interest of the sequels, it being Zion. Personally, I don't like it very much and for the small runtime it gets it should have been left for the third movie and better developed. It had the potential to be an another memorable Sci-Fi set piece but what do we get? Everybody wearing dirty rags, a council of diverse characters we learn nothing about and a cringy cave-rave. While the look and feel of the first movie was groundbreaking, the look and feel of the sequel is rather disappointing. Thanks to the entertaining action I rate it as an average sci-fi which is a shame considering what came before. In fact, I'm going to give the first movie full marks if I already haven't done so.
I might be wrong, but the sequels don't feel like they were counted on from the start. It is a different feeling when you plan to make a trilogy or you make one successful movie and stick two follow-ups onto it. This feels as the later, and the sequels are diminishing in returns. While the plot of the first movie is in essence pretty understandable with nerdy programmer stuff sprinkled in there for us geeks, the sequels double down on the geeky stuff and action.
The plot of the sequel is about saving Zion from an immediate threat of a robot army. It is highly advisable to watch the Final Flight of Osiris from The Animatrix, to better keep up with the characters, though it is not essential or necessary. The plotline inside the Matrix is basically a fetchquest with the goal to somehow save Zion as well, and there is a Smith Situation on top of that.
No-one will fault you if you can't quite keep up. I have seen the trilogy multiple times, am somewhat of a geek, an engineer familiar with programming (though not a programmer by trade) and I am not entirely sure that I understand it completely. The sequels dive really deep into philosophical waters at times with way too much expository dialogue that requires multiple rewatches to fully grasp. These parts are a determent to entertainment and do not stick with you as much as the messages of the first movie did. To balance this, there is the action which is excellent, though not really better than the first film. As a kid, I just used to watch the Burly Brawl and then the whole sequence since they get the Keymaker towards the end of the highway chase. You have some fighting with weapons, shootouts, highway chase including on a motorcycle. Very entertaining stuff.
Let me get back to the object of interest of the sequels, it being Zion. Personally, I don't like it very much and for the small runtime it gets it should have been left for the third movie and better developed. It had the potential to be an another memorable Sci-Fi set piece but what do we get? Everybody wearing dirty rags, a council of diverse characters we learn nothing about and a cringy cave-rave. While the look and feel of the first movie was groundbreaking, the look and feel of the sequel is rather disappointing. Thanks to the entertaining action I rate it as an average sci-fi which is a shame considering what came before. In fact, I'm going to give the first movie full marks if I already haven't done so.
Forced, over the top, less would have been more
12 April 2024
An animated movie about a dog becoming the protector samurai of a cat village. The movie is sort of nonoffensive fun for the kids, but the jokes feel formulaic and what's worse, repeated ad infinitum. You know that joke when you hear music in a movie and then see the musicians? They do a variation of this like 3-5 times. Other jokes are also continuously repeated which waters the whole thing down. There were some good ideas and the character design is funny, but ultimately the movie feels a bit like talking to your grandpa who tells a lame joke that might have been funny the first time years ago, but he keeps repeating the punchline and cracking up. The humor isn't so bad that it's cringe, but it isn't funny either. Of course a small child will see these jokes for the first time but that isn't much of an argument. Great animated movies entertain the young and old. This isn't a great animated movie. Not even average.
Sonic the Hedgehog 2
(2022)
When in doubt: Fetchquest
4 April 2024
Sonic the Hedgehog 2 is a harmless fun passtime aimed at kids that feels somewhat generic, by the numbers and uninspired. While the first Sonic was no cinematic masterpiece, it was still one of the better movies based on a popular series of games that is out there. While the movie has it's fun moments, ultimately it's pretty forgettable. The majority of the runtime is made up of a Fetchquest where the characters are trying to get to one McGuffin or another. I honestly thought that the movie was finished when they reached the main McGuffin, surprised only to learn that there were 1/4 of the runtime still left. The Finale was somewhat unexpected and help make the movie more memorable and somewhat better. I wish we could have gotten more character development from the main cast and perhaps a bit more lore. They touch upon the background of the characters but only slightly leaving you with more questions than answers. Perhaps that was intentional? Anyway, I hope they come up with a more interesting plot for the third movie than just an another fetchquest and there is the potential still to have it be better. If you are even remotely familiar with sonic, you have already guessed what they've teased for the next part...
Predestination
(I) (2014)
TimeTravelTomfoolery
3 April 2024
It has been 10 years since this movie came out, and I had been made somewhat aware of it in various online fora, memes, discussions and such. Whenever time travel shenanigans or WTF inducing plots are discussed, this movie is ought to come up sooner or later. Watching the movie somewhat pre-spoiled but not knowing the details robbed me of the surprising emotional journey I guess. If you can help it, try not to spoil the movie to yourself but I still feel like I could have guessed the most important plot beats before the movie reveals them to the audience. It is a good science fiction flick none the less and nowhere near as confusing as Primer. A pretty good time and not too long of a runtime.
Dune
(1984)
Exposition upon Exposition!
25 March 2024
Tell, don't show. That is the mantra of this movie. It doesn't really feel as a coherent story. It feels like someone who has read the books and is familiar with them is just ticking boxes of important events while totally neglecting all the setup and context. It feels like an abridged version of a story that was simply decimated to leave you every tenth page.
You as an audience can't keep up with the movie, because the movie never sets anything up. There is poison out of the blue, they use bombs that were never mentioned before, characters fall in love suddenly upon meeting. Then there is a time jump with a very lame voiceover. Could I have done it any better with the amount of content and the time available? I doubt it. Does that make it a good movie though? No.
It simply does not stand on its own. The movie can only ever be good as a supplement for someone familiar with the story, to see some of those scenes come to life. I can't comment on how true to the books the looks of the characters are, as I have not read them.
The acting is over the top though, sometimes even distracting, edging on becoming funny. The only thing I kind of liked was the set design and some of the costumes, so I don't rate it as complete failure, though I do not recommend watching this movie.
You as an audience can't keep up with the movie, because the movie never sets anything up. There is poison out of the blue, they use bombs that were never mentioned before, characters fall in love suddenly upon meeting. Then there is a time jump with a very lame voiceover. Could I have done it any better with the amount of content and the time available? I doubt it. Does that make it a good movie though? No.
It simply does not stand on its own. The movie can only ever be good as a supplement for someone familiar with the story, to see some of those scenes come to life. I can't comment on how true to the books the looks of the characters are, as I have not read them.
The acting is over the top though, sometimes even distracting, edging on becoming funny. The only thing I kind of liked was the set design and some of the costumes, so I don't rate it as complete failure, though I do not recommend watching this movie.
A Beautiful Mind
(2001)
Go in blind, don't even look up John Nash online if you haven't already done so
20 March 2024
The reason why I got interested to view this movie was, that it won a bunch of academy awards in 2002 over LOTR the Fellowship of the Ring. I have seen no trailers, have read no plot synopsis, I barely even knew who stared in it and I think that for the greatest impact that is the correct way to view the movie. Don't even read anything about the real life John Nash, it'll just spoil things. As such, I will not go over the plot in any detail. All I will say is that if you watched about the first third of the movie and are a bit confused as to what's actually going on, where is this heading, and what is the point... just hang in there. It'll become very clear eventually.
The technical aspects of the movie are all very well done. The acting, and direction are very good as you'd expect though I don't understand how a movie receives best picture and best direction without the lead receiving an award for acting. I think Russell Crowe did a very good job such that you can emphasize with his situation to the point that the movie might jerk a tear or two during its' runtime.
Do I think it is better than the Fellowship of the Ring in any of the categories where it won though? No.
The technical aspects of the movie are all very well done. The acting, and direction are very good as you'd expect though I don't understand how a movie receives best picture and best direction without the lead receiving an award for acting. I think Russell Crowe did a very good job such that you can emphasize with his situation to the point that the movie might jerk a tear or two during its' runtime.
Do I think it is better than the Fellowship of the Ring in any of the categories where it won though? No.
Dune: Part Two
(2024)
Essential cinema experience for any sci-fi fan
15 March 2024
Every once in a while a movie comes along that simply needs to be experienced in a cinema and this is one of them. Even more so if you consider yourself a sci-fi fan because regardless if you vibe with the story of DUNE, I think most people would agree the the craft that went into making these two movies is objectively undisputable.
Personally, I don't give full rating because I could think of a couple plot holes and the pacing might be slow at times, but the visuals and the music are truly breathtaking and as such deserve the movie the price of the movie tickets.
This movie is CGI done right. CGI in and of itself is a great tool to enhance practical sets and bring to life imaginary creatures and worlds, but it should aim to enhance and not replace. Compare the budget of the Dune vs any recent MCU movie and tell me which one looks better, is more memorable?
I hope it makes a ton of money, which could signal the studios that this is what we want.
Personally, I don't give full rating because I could think of a couple plot holes and the pacing might be slow at times, but the visuals and the music are truly breathtaking and as such deserve the movie the price of the movie tickets.
This movie is CGI done right. CGI in and of itself is a great tool to enhance practical sets and bring to life imaginary creatures and worlds, but it should aim to enhance and not replace. Compare the budget of the Dune vs any recent MCU movie and tell me which one looks better, is more memorable?
I hope it makes a ton of money, which could signal the studios that this is what we want.
Captain Fantastic
(2016)
Interesting is a non-word
5 March 2024
Well, that was... Interesting. The movie is well shot, well acted, very well acted in fact and the plot has left me unsure about how I feel about it. Ben has by all means the best intentions when raising his kids to be self proficient and strong, though I can't help but question whether his worldview isn't too cynical? Perhaps, but I can't help but see where's he coming from and makes me look at myself with a bit more criticism. The movie won't make you want to go live in a forest, at least it doesn't do that for me. It does make me want to be better though. I was going to rate the movie 7-8/10 based purely on enjoyment but when I think about it further, I think I'm going to bump it up to 10, because as a criticism of modern society and for a story about family I think it is perfect. As usual, if I can't think of anything I'd do differently or better, I opt to give a 10/10 and for this story it stands.
Northmen: A Viking Saga
(2014)
Fun B Movie
28 February 2024
Honestly, this is not a very good, but I never expected it to be. It is loads of fun though, even if sometimes that fun is laughing at the movie, not with it. I have found out about the movie from the Amon Amarth Videoclip for the deceiver of the gods, and it does also feature the Frontman Johan Hegg for a while.
The movie is sort of Pulpy, rather Fantasy, LARP and DnD than anything historical but sometimes I want to watch a simple fantasy-ish romaticized movie about pagan warriors. I think the movie is fun enough, and I tend to watch it when I im the mood for something entertaining with a viking-ish vibe. This really hits the spot, so fill your horns with mead and beer, sit back and enjoy, skoll.
Fun Fact, The movie was shot in south Africa as far as I know.
The movie is sort of Pulpy, rather Fantasy, LARP and DnD than anything historical but sometimes I want to watch a simple fantasy-ish romaticized movie about pagan warriors. I think the movie is fun enough, and I tend to watch it when I im the mood for something entertaining with a viking-ish vibe. This really hits the spot, so fill your horns with mead and beer, sit back and enjoy, skoll.
Fun Fact, The movie was shot in south Africa as far as I know.
So far so good
28 February 2024
The Boys has been popping up for me from the beginning in the form of various memes, or in discussions generally about movies and series, with responses usually being positive. So I gave it a chance yesterday and now I am writing my opinions under episode 3, because I watched 3 episodes in one breath. Yes, the series is quite captivating and good. The action, brutality, humor but mainly the satire so far is excellent and I am curious where it will develop further. I must say, the storyline from the point of view of Starlight is very well processed. I enjoy hating the corporate fools she has to face.
Legend
(I) (2015)
Tom Hardy is excellent, the movie is not
22 February 2024
Real life isn't very cinematic. This movie makes you really realize that. While there can be entertaining, dramatic and exciting biopics, I don't feel this is one of them.
The performance by Tom Hardy, as pointed out in many other reviews is excellent. It was the reason why I gave the movie a chance, and the reason why I kept on watching until the end. Other than that, the plot is all over the place and the direction is sort of boring. If this were a movie shot by Guy Ritchie, I see him making it more entertaining but as is there isn't much to grasp except for Hardy in the main role. The plot has no urgency, no clearly defined goal, no real stakes to be honest. What is the plot about? They go around buying up clubs. I can hardly recall and I saw the movie yesterday. I feel the story lacks a clear structure or message. What was the point of it? To portray the life of the titular twins? Well, I never heard about them before and after watching the movie I can't say I am too interested to find out anything about them either. The movie is called legend, but I never got why are they legendary, or what is the legend? Sadly, one outstanding performance is not enough to elevate this movie from being forgettable. I almost already forgot completely about it and as such, it isn't really worth the time invested in watching it.
The performance by Tom Hardy, as pointed out in many other reviews is excellent. It was the reason why I gave the movie a chance, and the reason why I kept on watching until the end. Other than that, the plot is all over the place and the direction is sort of boring. If this were a movie shot by Guy Ritchie, I see him making it more entertaining but as is there isn't much to grasp except for Hardy in the main role. The plot has no urgency, no clearly defined goal, no real stakes to be honest. What is the plot about? They go around buying up clubs. I can hardly recall and I saw the movie yesterday. I feel the story lacks a clear structure or message. What was the point of it? To portray the life of the titular twins? Well, I never heard about them before and after watching the movie I can't say I am too interested to find out anything about them either. The movie is called legend, but I never got why are they legendary, or what is the legend? Sadly, one outstanding performance is not enough to elevate this movie from being forgettable. I almost already forgot completely about it and as such, it isn't really worth the time invested in watching it.
Evan Almighty
(2007)
Feels forced
21 February 2024
Evan Almighty, the spinoff of Bruce Almighty is a lesser forced cashgrab that falls apart as soon as you try and even remotely think about it. The movie is only saved by the comedic talents of Steve Carell, thanks to whom the movie does have some fun gags. Most of them you'll see in the trailer though so I'll leave it up to you If you'd find this movie a waste or time or not. For me, I don't mind the movie as background noise when it is already on TV, but it would never occur to me to watch it from my own will. I don't mind watching it, but there are some major problems.
The first one is right there in the title. They wanted to let the audience know that this was related to the better received Bruce Almighty, but the problem is that Evan isn't indeed "Almighty". Evan is LARPing Moses from the bible, but is not allpowerful god as Bruce was.
The Moses Larping is also problematic. It is very clear that they wanted to make a movie where the character of Evan builds an Arch and some animal related gags. Those are OK, but the problem is that they failed to come up with a compelling reason for all this. When said Arch should have saved the inhabitants of the urban area that is flooded, then what was the point of bringing Elephants and Lamas from god knows where on board? They could have had a valid reason by showing us a Zoo in the neighborhood, but they couldn't be bothered. And the endgame of the story isn't some personal growth, a moral lesson but something about real estate law. Let's not pretend that Bruce Almighty is some sort of masterpiece, but compared to this movie it is. It's title and plot while simple, at least makes a remote kind of sense. Here the plot is bult around the idea of having a dude turn into Moses and build an arch? Why? Who cares...
This lack of effort makes the movie feels forced and ultimately forgettable. Viewing the Box Office results, the movie didn't even break even, which is not surprising at all.
The first one is right there in the title. They wanted to let the audience know that this was related to the better received Bruce Almighty, but the problem is that Evan isn't indeed "Almighty". Evan is LARPing Moses from the bible, but is not allpowerful god as Bruce was.
The Moses Larping is also problematic. It is very clear that they wanted to make a movie where the character of Evan builds an Arch and some animal related gags. Those are OK, but the problem is that they failed to come up with a compelling reason for all this. When said Arch should have saved the inhabitants of the urban area that is flooded, then what was the point of bringing Elephants and Lamas from god knows where on board? They could have had a valid reason by showing us a Zoo in the neighborhood, but they couldn't be bothered. And the endgame of the story isn't some personal growth, a moral lesson but something about real estate law. Let's not pretend that Bruce Almighty is some sort of masterpiece, but compared to this movie it is. It's title and plot while simple, at least makes a remote kind of sense. Here the plot is bult around the idea of having a dude turn into Moses and build an arch? Why? Who cares...
This lack of effort makes the movie feels forced and ultimately forgettable. Viewing the Box Office results, the movie didn't even break even, which is not surprising at all.
Her
(2013)
Concerning commentary of where we're headed
20 February 2024
"Her" is a thought-provoking film directed by Spike Jonze, that beautifully approaches themes of love, loneliness, and the nature of consciousness. Set in the not-so-distant future, the film follows protagonist Theodore Twombly, masterfully portrayed by Joaquin Phoenix, a lonely man who develops a complex relationship with an intelligent operating system, voiced by Scarlett Johansson.
The film skillfully explores the intersection of technology and personal relationships, raising compelling questions about the nature of love and connection. "Her" is lauded for its in-depth character exploration, innovative concept, stunning visual style, and poignant script. Additionally, the exceptional performances, particularly by Phoenix and Johansson, add depth to the novel narrative.
What you have just read is an AI generated review, which I though was fitting and an interesting counterpart as I personally feel quite the opposite. An Artificial Intelligence thinks the portrayal of the love onscreen is beautiful, I found it concerning. The movie is more than 10 years old, so we are slowly approaching the future depicted and even though I found some of the concepts rather ridiculous, sadly they might not be very removed from an actual reality that eventually waits for us. Who knows what things considered normal today would have been seen as ridiculous in the past? A whole lot I think.
I haven't read any other reviews because I feel like my confusion about the movie is genuine and close to what others might feel. I am torn if I'd rather describe the displayed future as a utopia or distopia? For one, the characters all seem to be safe and secure in a big city. The streets are all very clean, no mention of any violence that I can recall and to be honest, the discussion about falling in love with an OS is very much a first world problem when you no longer need to worry about existential questions, so from this point of view, the future is bright. On the other hand, people had become so distant that one can make a living (and a pretty nice one apparently) by writing other people's letters. I fail to grasp the point of a birthday letter if written by a stranger. I also struggle with the fact that as the movie progresses, the OS isn't shown to be doing anything much beyond companionship and Theodore develops real feelings towards something artificial. I really don't find the relationship endearing in any way, I find it concerning. As such I take the movie as commentary and maybe even satire of how distant we are becoming and how much more time we spend in artificial environments rather than with other people. As such, the movie is a though provoking watch that I can recommend. Let me go and read how other people understood the movie.
The film skillfully explores the intersection of technology and personal relationships, raising compelling questions about the nature of love and connection. "Her" is lauded for its in-depth character exploration, innovative concept, stunning visual style, and poignant script. Additionally, the exceptional performances, particularly by Phoenix and Johansson, add depth to the novel narrative.
What you have just read is an AI generated review, which I though was fitting and an interesting counterpart as I personally feel quite the opposite. An Artificial Intelligence thinks the portrayal of the love onscreen is beautiful, I found it concerning. The movie is more than 10 years old, so we are slowly approaching the future depicted and even though I found some of the concepts rather ridiculous, sadly they might not be very removed from an actual reality that eventually waits for us. Who knows what things considered normal today would have been seen as ridiculous in the past? A whole lot I think.
I haven't read any other reviews because I feel like my confusion about the movie is genuine and close to what others might feel. I am torn if I'd rather describe the displayed future as a utopia or distopia? For one, the characters all seem to be safe and secure in a big city. The streets are all very clean, no mention of any violence that I can recall and to be honest, the discussion about falling in love with an OS is very much a first world problem when you no longer need to worry about existential questions, so from this point of view, the future is bright. On the other hand, people had become so distant that one can make a living (and a pretty nice one apparently) by writing other people's letters. I fail to grasp the point of a birthday letter if written by a stranger. I also struggle with the fact that as the movie progresses, the OS isn't shown to be doing anything much beyond companionship and Theodore develops real feelings towards something artificial. I really don't find the relationship endearing in any way, I find it concerning. As such I take the movie as commentary and maybe even satire of how distant we are becoming and how much more time we spend in artificial environments rather than with other people. As such, the movie is a though provoking watch that I can recommend. Let me go and read how other people understood the movie.
Prisoners
(2013)
A Thriller in the true meaning of the word
16 February 2024
I usually choose to rate 10/10 when I can't think of anything I myself would have done otherwise or if there weren't any issues apparent to me during viewing. This is one of those movies. Though in hindsight there might be things that pop up, having seen the movie yesterday for the first time I really can't think of anything that could have improved the experience for me.
This movie is excellently written, paced and acted. The camera work fits story being told with a couple of fun shots, like Loki in the basement. I rarely praise the writing of a movie, but this is truly excellently put together for a thrilling experience.
The movie gives away just enough information for you to be able to guess every next twist, yet not so much to let you figure out the whole picture. It makes for a somewhat cathartic viewing when you feel smart for figuring out the next plot beat a bit sooner than the characters, yet being just as lost as they are in the grand scheme of things. I believe that this was done intentionally and it works. The movie takes you on a rollercoaster of emotions.
Speaking of emotions, the acting is really excellent. Hugh Jackman really sells the despair of a parent pushed to the limits making the movie all the more disturbing if you have kids of your own. Would I call watching the movie a good time? No, not really. It is a thrilling time, it is memorable and certainly worth your time!
This movie is excellently written, paced and acted. The camera work fits story being told with a couple of fun shots, like Loki in the basement. I rarely praise the writing of a movie, but this is truly excellently put together for a thrilling experience.
The movie gives away just enough information for you to be able to guess every next twist, yet not so much to let you figure out the whole picture. It makes for a somewhat cathartic viewing when you feel smart for figuring out the next plot beat a bit sooner than the characters, yet being just as lost as they are in the grand scheme of things. I believe that this was done intentionally and it works. The movie takes you on a rollercoaster of emotions.
Speaking of emotions, the acting is really excellent. Hugh Jackman really sells the despair of a parent pushed to the limits making the movie all the more disturbing if you have kids of your own. Would I call watching the movie a good time? No, not really. It is a thrilling time, it is memorable and certainly worth your time!
Togo
(2019)
Fantastic dog movie without ridiculous CGI Animals.
14 February 2024
This movie came out at a similar time as The Call of the Wild featuring Harrison Ford and an atrocious CGI dog. This is by far the superior of the two movies. For one the Dogs are real which is a huge plus in the favor of this movie. The Story is compelling and deserves to be told even if there are some historical inaccuracies. I really enjoyed this movie and have seen it a couple times already. The acting from Willem Dafoe is excellent as always. The Dogs also do a very good job acting in the movie making for 114 minutes of entertainment for a dog lover. I'd almost give the movie 10/10 but there are a couple things that didn't sit too well with me. For one, I don't understand the artistic choice to blur the edges of the picture and thus hide the beautiful scenery. The other is a somewhat melodramatic way the ending is portrayed. I won't get into specifics to avoid spoilers, but for how the ending is presented it feels kind of melodramatic to me, but that might be because I don't understand dog sledding at all tbh.
Fiddler on the Roof
(1971)
Because Tevye!
12 February 2024
Maybe you are like me: I had a vague awareness of the existence of this movie, but I knew absolutely nothing about it other than the song sampled by Gwen Stefani and that apparently it is good.
Are you like me? Good! Let me then tell you, as someone who had already seen the movie, that i is good. Very good and I will also tell you why.
... I don't know.
Well I do know, it is because Tevye, the protagonist. That bearded guy from the trailers and the poster. For me at least, he appears as such a genuine good guy that I didn't mind the runtime, I was just happy to be a part of his family and tradition for a while. Towards the end he does make a choice many would disagree with, but he redeems himself in my opinion and I understand his struggle.
An another thing I'd like to mention, is his genuine relationship with god and his religion. While I am an atheist myself, I can respect someone like Tevye. His religion doesn't always make him a better person, but I find his conversations with god endearing. I could certainly rather see myself be friends with Tevye than with one of holier than thou fanatics you might meet today.
In conclusion, just as the trailer couldn't really tell me what exactly the movie was, neither can I tell you. Perhaps it is because, there isn't really much more to the plot than it's simple premise, yet the movie is handled very well. The songs, choreography, the acting and camera are all good and make the movie worth a watch.
Are you like me? Good! Let me then tell you, as someone who had already seen the movie, that i is good. Very good and I will also tell you why.
... I don't know.
Well I do know, it is because Tevye, the protagonist. That bearded guy from the trailers and the poster. For me at least, he appears as such a genuine good guy that I didn't mind the runtime, I was just happy to be a part of his family and tradition for a while. Towards the end he does make a choice many would disagree with, but he redeems himself in my opinion and I understand his struggle.
An another thing I'd like to mention, is his genuine relationship with god and his religion. While I am an atheist myself, I can respect someone like Tevye. His religion doesn't always make him a better person, but I find his conversations with god endearing. I could certainly rather see myself be friends with Tevye than with one of holier than thou fanatics you might meet today.
In conclusion, just as the trailer couldn't really tell me what exactly the movie was, neither can I tell you. Perhaps it is because, there isn't really much more to the plot than it's simple premise, yet the movie is handled very well. The songs, choreography, the acting and camera are all good and make the movie worth a watch.
Timeless trilogy that will probably never be toped
6 February 2024
First of all, it is difficult to write a separate review per single movie when in my mind it is one continuous story that only happens to be split up into three instances. Second, how can I even start to summarize my mixture of thoughts for a trilogy I have deeply loved ever since it came out over 20 years ago. Here is my attempt at it.
I don't think recapping the plot is necessary as you can read the premise and I wouldn't dare spoil any more to people who are just about to watch the movies. The movie came out at a similar time as the Harry Potter movies did, to this day I can't really decide which franchise is a better adaptation of it's fantasy template (the books). At any case, I haven't seen a better adaptation ever since. The attention to detail when it comes to the sets, props, costumes is unmatched. If you ever watch the Making of features, you'll see that working on the Lord of the Rings was never just a 'job'. It was passion where everyone gave their 120% and it shows. Real sets which breath lore, real costumes that look weathered and worn, real acting from the cast.
What makes the movies so compelling? At first we are shown the peacefulness of the Shire, as in the place worth fighting for. Then the heroes go on an epic journey trough realms of elves, dwarves, and various hostile creatures to defeat an evil that threatens to destroy the peacefulness of the inhabitans of this fantasy world. It is a formula that make such a compelling story, that it has been copied over and over since the original books came out. This was the original fantasy story. Each location you encounter feels like you are seeing just the tip of an iceberg of history and lore. Rightfully so, because Tolkien did indeed come up with a complete history for his fantasy world and then just placed his characters into it. Tolkiens dedication towards his fictional world is yet to be matched. Some might argue that modern Authors like Jordan or Sanderson compare or even top Tolkien. I don't agree but that is personal preference and a different kind of rant.
Of course there have been changes made against the book to make the movies more cinematic. There are some nitpicky scenes and plot holes you might notice if you have seen the movie 20 times like me. I don't mind the differences though, because it gives me a reason to enjoy the books as much as the movies. I wouldn't dare call either better or worse, just different. To mention some differences, there were characters omitted, some characterization is a bit different. I Prefer book Frodo and Faramir, but Movie Aragorn and Sam. Book Frodo and Faramir are both more competent and wise than shown in the movie, Sam on the other hand seems to me as loyal simpleton in the books. Aragorn of the books is the sort of legendary hero whose character is already developed when we meet him. A king on the way to claim his throne. The Aragorn in the movies still needs to make this character development, and become the king which is IMO more compelling to watch.
I don't think that there is anything I could write or say to persuade you to like these movies as much as I do. If you see the movies and the Ride of the Rohirim towards the pelenor fields doesn't move you emotionally, If don't feel any suspense at weathertop are not relieved at the first daylight of the fifth day then these movies are simply not for you and our tastes are not compatible. The more I think about it, I really do believe that LOTR is the Star Wars of my generation in terms of cultural significance.
I don't think recapping the plot is necessary as you can read the premise and I wouldn't dare spoil any more to people who are just about to watch the movies. The movie came out at a similar time as the Harry Potter movies did, to this day I can't really decide which franchise is a better adaptation of it's fantasy template (the books). At any case, I haven't seen a better adaptation ever since. The attention to detail when it comes to the sets, props, costumes is unmatched. If you ever watch the Making of features, you'll see that working on the Lord of the Rings was never just a 'job'. It was passion where everyone gave their 120% and it shows. Real sets which breath lore, real costumes that look weathered and worn, real acting from the cast.
What makes the movies so compelling? At first we are shown the peacefulness of the Shire, as in the place worth fighting for. Then the heroes go on an epic journey trough realms of elves, dwarves, and various hostile creatures to defeat an evil that threatens to destroy the peacefulness of the inhabitans of this fantasy world. It is a formula that make such a compelling story, that it has been copied over and over since the original books came out. This was the original fantasy story. Each location you encounter feels like you are seeing just the tip of an iceberg of history and lore. Rightfully so, because Tolkien did indeed come up with a complete history for his fantasy world and then just placed his characters into it. Tolkiens dedication towards his fictional world is yet to be matched. Some might argue that modern Authors like Jordan or Sanderson compare or even top Tolkien. I don't agree but that is personal preference and a different kind of rant.
Of course there have been changes made against the book to make the movies more cinematic. There are some nitpicky scenes and plot holes you might notice if you have seen the movie 20 times like me. I don't mind the differences though, because it gives me a reason to enjoy the books as much as the movies. I wouldn't dare call either better or worse, just different. To mention some differences, there were characters omitted, some characterization is a bit different. I Prefer book Frodo and Faramir, but Movie Aragorn and Sam. Book Frodo and Faramir are both more competent and wise than shown in the movie, Sam on the other hand seems to me as loyal simpleton in the books. Aragorn of the books is the sort of legendary hero whose character is already developed when we meet him. A king on the way to claim his throne. The Aragorn in the movies still needs to make this character development, and become the king which is IMO more compelling to watch.
I don't think that there is anything I could write or say to persuade you to like these movies as much as I do. If you see the movies and the Ride of the Rohirim towards the pelenor fields doesn't move you emotionally, If don't feel any suspense at weathertop are not relieved at the first daylight of the fifth day then these movies are simply not for you and our tastes are not compatible. The more I think about it, I really do believe that LOTR is the Star Wars of my generation in terms of cultural significance.
Tell Your Friends