Jerghal Reviews

Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare (2014 Video Game)

Hollywood style blockbuster game

[9/10 · 21 November 2021]

I played this game now in novermber 2021 with all settings on Max on my RTX3070 and I have to say: this game looks incredible for a 7 year old game.

Even if it would come out now I would still consider the graphics top level.

Sure the story is cookie cutter nonsense, but the single player campaign is super entertaining, and the game mechanics work very well.

I finished it in a little under 10 hours, some might do it in 7 and yes you might say that is short but Return to Castle Wolfenstein for example and many other older shooters clocked in at also about 10 hours. So long enough for me. If you want more, you can play the multiplayer I guess, which I don't give a rats ass about :)

you can buy it for 15 euros or less which is good value for money.

So highly recommended!

Doctor Sleep (2019)

Nice for Shining fans but not a classic

[7/10 · 25 January 2020]

I wasn't sure in what way this movie was connected to The Shining to which it is the official sequel. Well some scenes are recreated with other actors, so no CGI versions or altered images. Doctor Sleep is about Danny (or Doc), the kid who's father went rather nuts in The Shining. He had a rough life but managed to contain the demons from the Overlook hotel and moves to another town to start again. But off course there are other evildoers at large... It clocks in at 2,5 hours and actually feels a bit like a TV series. It's good entertainment and it keeps you interested and engaged but takes a decent while to get going. McGregor does a decent job, but the star of the movie is Rebecca Furgusson as she makes for a charismatic antagonist. As most movies these days it's not actually very scary but it has a good atmosphere and has good production values. I guess it's a recommended watch for Shining fans but I won't be watching this again anytime soon, because of the length and also because it's far from a classic. 7,5/10 for me!

Yummy (2019)

It's alright but certainly not among the best

[6/10 · 25 December 2019]

The movie is pretty much what I expected: a horror movie that doesn't take itself too seriously. There is humor in it that works most of the time. Though for a horror movie it's actually not that explicit: real gore is off camera mostly, you actually don't see that much. At a certain moment a head is bashed in with a fire extinguisher, but you only see the blood splatter, not the head being bashed in. They should have gone the 'braindead/dead alive' route with much over the top gore, that would add to the comedy and make it funnier. The 90 minutes go by smoothly and it's a decent watch but don't expect it to be a horror classic.

Solo: A Star Wars Story (2018)

Probably the weakest new Star Wars movie till now

[7/10 · 24 May 2018]

You would think a movie about scoundrel and adventurer Han Solo would be more exciting and riveting, certainly with the talent and money they spent on this production but unfortunately it isn't.

First off, the VFX are actually quite good, but the flick suffers from the same syndrome most action movies seem to have since the first Transformers movies which is chaotic shaky-cam action where the camera is way to close to the action so you can't clearly see what's going on and quickly stop caring about who's shooting who. There was one distinct action scene (the best in the movie) that didn't suffer from this problem but most others did alas.

Speaking of visuals, each scene seems to have a very monochromatic look (blue, yellow, grey, etc) which reinforced the feeling that this was a boring movie even more. And the 3D (IMAX in my case) was almost unnoticeable so don't waste any money on that.

The music was also a mixed bag. On one hand you have the classic Star Wars themes, and on the action scenes you had like music from Ghost In the Shell 2 (very anime like) which didn't seem to fit the movie at all. It was different from the other new releases but not in a good way.

Story wise you see all the things you heard as character backstory about Han and Lando but it feels like going through the motions, putting it on film for the cannon but do we need to see it? The pacing in this film is slow in the sense that movie feels like it drags on way too long. There are so many scenes where people are jabbering but it still doesn't feel like the story is advancing. I also felt little connection for these characters and their well being. Some die (actually for no apparent reason - it's just lazy script writing) and you just won't care.

The villain is a bit weak and there never seems to be a sense of urgency or a drive towards something. The film just floats along drifting towards the end that seems to take forever to get there.

Oh yeah, everybody feared that BB2 was going to be annoying (in Force Awakens) but luckily he wasn't but the new robot here called L3 surely is.

I hoped for the best for this movie and even as a die hard Star Wars fan it's difficult to recommend it. Just see it once, and move on to better cinematic works out there.

What Happened to Monday (2017)

Another mediocre Netflix movie

[6/10 · 20 August 2017]

The subject of overpopulation is one that has been brought up in many scifi movies but most just use it as a situational backdrop and don't really address the problem per se. And for this movie it's the same. It quickly falls back to the cliché good (here the 7 sisters, the one's adding to the overpopulation problem) versus evil (the one's actually trying to do something about the overpopulation problem).

The plot is rather thin and has a little 'twist' in it at the end but for the rest just falls back to all the standard scifi clichés. A large part of the film is dedicated to the sisters being chased by the bad guys (you know the scene where the bad guys get out the the SWAT team truck and the main gorilla says 'find them'). This would not be a big problem (in The Matrix for example there is also a large 'chase' part) if the chase scenes were done well and had interesting action in them but unfortunately you feel like you're watching scenes you have seen many times before but done better in other movies.

Noomi Rapace does an okay job making us believe these 7 sisters have different personalities but because of the aforementioned chase scenes there isn't that much time dedicated to the development of these characters.

The cast is padded with Willem Dafoe and Glen Close (who looks very weird and artificial, she looks CGI even when she's just there :)). The presence of these actors is supposed to add more weight to the short scenes that they are in but it only partially works because the script only gives them superficial dialogue to work with.

So what could have been a more cerebral scifi movie just turns out to be a overly long (124 mins is too much, it should have been cut down to 100 mins) standard action/scifi flick that's an okay watch but nothing I would wholeheartedly recommend.

Mechanic: Resurrection (2016)

As cliché as action movies get

[6/10 · 12 November 2016]

Jason Statham has a monopoly on the action movie market because he seems to be in every single one of them and seems to play the same character every time. The film is not really a sequel to the mechanic remake in which he also played so there is no need to having seen that one - it works stand alone. Mechanic Resurrection is as about cliché as action movies get: a bad guy kidnaps Statham's girlfriend so he has to do some assassinations in interesting ways on far away locations. The plot is full of holes (you really have to stop thinking if things in this movie would work or be possible in real life or you'll get really annoyed by this flick) and the dialogue is cookie cutter stuff. The film was made on a shoestring budget and shot mostly in Bulgaria with the 1134 VFX shots also done by a Bulgarian company...and you can tell coz when for example a boat blows up they just composited the explosion and flames onto it, the boat doesn't move an inch and there is no debris flying around. A lot of scenes where shot on a blue-screen stage and you can easily tell which ones coz they have this overly bright 'studio lighting' look. The fight scenes are descent but like I said nothing you haven't seen before in another Statham film. So conclusion: you won't see anything you haven't seen before here and the film is mediocre at best. You won't be bored but this is definitely NOT a must see by any stretch of the imagination.

Doctor Strange (2016)

The best Marvel movie since The Avengers and Guardians!

[9/10 · 2 November 2016]

I'd never heard of Doctor Strange, but neither did I know Ant-man or even Thor before they made movies of these comic book characters. Now Marvel has become such a household name and quality label that at this point people will just about watch any Marvel film thats released... ...and they won't be disappointed coz it's REALLY good. The casting of Cumberbatch was brilliant. He has the perfect combination of wittiness, arrogance, charisma and is incredibly likable and has a great sense of comedic timing. They also considered other actors (Keanu Reeves, Jake Gyllenhaal, Joaquin Phoenix, etc) for this role (and Cumberbatch almost had to skip because of his Hamlet play) but the film would not have been the same without Benedict. The film's story takes a bit of time to build Strange's character before it gets to the meat but I found it very well done and didn't feel like it slowed down the movie. Once the action starts we get amazing VFX scenes, I mean it has been a long time (could be since The Matrix came out in 1999) since I've been wowed by VFX, but this film does it! A-level flawless effects work. Made me feel a bit sorry I'd went and saw it in 2D coz those VFX scenes will probably work wondrously well in 3D or IMAX (reviews seem to confirm that). Talking about the Matrix, this film reminded me of it at times. It also has elements from Inception and probably some other films but it never felt like it ripped them off (The Matrix itself 'ripped off' many other classics). At 115 mins Dr. Strange is one of the shorter ones in the MCU but it didn't feel like it needed to be longer. I had a great time with Doctor Strange and I consider it the best since The Avengers film and Guardians of the Galaxy. It has the same light humorous tone and a great cast and awesome visuals. As you might have guessed: HIGHLY recommended!

Ghostbusters: Answer the Call (2016)

People are taking it a bit too personal, it's an okay but also unnecessary movie

[7/10 · 29 September 2016]

The remake everyone hates...if we judge by the number of dislikes on youtube for the trailer. The reviews weren't too kind either. But I have seen a couple movies in my time and I think I realistically knew what to expect from this film. GB2016 is certainly not as bad as all the press would have you think. The 'if you don't like this movie you hate women' spin that Sony put on it in an attempt to shush the haters was maybe not the best approach either. It's like this: people remember the original very fondly. It had a great atmosphere, good acting and humor and brought us great entertainment. The fact that they are remaking a film that doesn't need to be remade (just watch the original again youngsters!) is enough to get anyone's blood boiling and is a large part of the reason people were p*ssed off without even having seen the trailer. Also Paul Feig (dir of Bridesmaids & The Heat) with his awkward comedy that often doesn't work and makes you squirm in your seat had me very worried. Fortunately the comedy wasn't too bad here. The 4 girls did a decent job -I very much liked Kate McKinnon with her dry in your face funniness- but they are never at the same level as the original cast. And neither would male actors have been for that matter. The VFX are decent but I was wondering the whole time why this film had cost 144m$ to make? Some people must have had some very nice paychecks. The movie looks like it could have been made for half the price... Conclusion: it's an okay film, you won't be bored (I wasn't) but it just won't be a classic like the original and it will probably be more remembered for all the controversy than for the film itself.

The Legend of Tarzan (2016)

Poor rendition of a poorly written story

[6/10 · 25 September 2016]

Why do they keep remaking this story? It's really, really not that interesting (just like Peter Pan for that matter). Okay so maybe it's not 'exactly' the same coz here Tarzan is an English Lord in the beginning of the flick and he gets convinced to go back coz evil old Belgian Leopold II might be enslaving the pour Congolese in secret. Christopher Waltz plays the same old cliché bad guy he seems to play in every other film he's done (except Inglorious Bastards - there he was REALLY good). He's the one who leading evil old Belgian Leopold II's mission in case you were wondering. So what else...oh, the CGI monkeys, well I thought Kong in King Kong of 2005 looked better. The other CGI animals (I guess VFX companies must be sick of having to produce digital zoo's) look decent enough but like I said, I've seen better (e.g. Jungle Book). The shots were Tarzan swings of the vines look rather fake and unrealistic. Same goes for other action scenes which seem cartoony and highly unlikely. As for the actors: Skarsgard was cast for his enormous ehm...closet which they pumped up some more so he looks like a 2,5 meter high stack of six packs. Sam Jakson is also present but he just chews up the scenery though I must say that it can't be easy with such lame dialogue and poor scriptwriting. So overall a rather poor rendition of an already sucked dry story. Just watch the Disney animated version from 1999 again, that one was pretty good and had a soundtrack by Phil Collins.

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Out of the Shadows (2016)

Ridiculous as hell but that's what you'd expect

[6/10 · 11 September 2016]

I'm trying to remember which one is worse: this one or the now 2 year old predecessor. Oh well, doesn't matter does it. I think this one is the worst one probably. The film is ridiculous as hell but you can't really expect much else from an adaptation of a pizza munching mutant ninja turtles cartoon. Some things just don't translate well into live action and it doesn't help that Michael Bay produced either I'm guessing. So if you're 12 years old or less or you like retarded action movies you'll probably have lots of fun, everyone else will roll their eyes till they drop out of their sockets. You know what you're getting into right...

The Conjuring 2 (2016)

Does nothing new but it does what it does very, very well

[8/10 · 11 September 2016]

Honestly, I was not planning on seeing this film. You know, another haunted house film? What can they do that hasn't been done a 1000 times before right? Well, enter James Wan: he makes a flick for some 10's of millions (40 here) and it makes hundreds at the box office (320 to be exact). Why is that? Coz they work, that's why! So I saw it because it got good reviews but even then I was full of suspicion. But yeah, like I said before: it works. Not because it really does something new -it doesn't- but because it does what it does very well. The movie feels fresh and entertaining and never bores despite its 2 hour running time. But if you're sick of haunted house films and never want to see one again I won't blame ya, but if you do want to see one again then see this one alright :)

The Neon Demon (2016)

A work of audio-visual art

[8/10 · 11 September 2016]

I'm sure lots of people won't get this movie so it's probably going to be a 'like it' or 'leave it' flick. I liked it. The Neon Demon is visually stunning and has a hypnotizing quality thanks to the combination of images and the excellent soundscapes delivered by Refn's house composer Cliff Martinez. The film's story seems superficial and shallow and all focused on looks very much mirroring the world of modeling which is what this movie is about. It's hard to describe this movie, you have to like the 'feel' and style of it. For me this movie proves that movies don't always have to be story driven but rather can be works of visual art. Although I found 'Only God Forgives' a tad better, I do give a big thumbs up to this one and recommend you check it out!

Brewster's Millions (1985)

Solid eighties comedy

[7/10 · 26 July 2016]

In the golden eighties a lot of these 'what if you where stinking rich?' movies were made coz that's what everybody wanted to be then I guess. Greed was good! Brewsters Millions is of of these flicks, and I remember having seen the cover of it in the VHS rental store many times but I think I hadn't gotten around to seeing it yet then so I gave it a go. Brewster (Pryor) has to spend 30 million $ in 30 days and end up with no possessions but the shirt on his back as a condition to inherit 300m$ from his uncle. The films is not as excessive as they would have made it these days but it's plain fun though nothing exceptional. I probably would have liked it more when I'd seen it in the 80s. So not an 80's classic but you could do a lot worse when it comes to comedies.

The Ardennes (2015)

Reminds me why I used to hate Flemish movies

[5/10 · 22 July 2016]

This film reminds me why I used to hate Flemish films so much. The last couple of years we had some good ones thanks to Felix Van Groeningen and others. Those movies were either in West-Flemish or East-Flemish and had very likable characters and great stories. D'Ardennen on the other hand is in sucky Antwerps and is one of those stories with miserable low-life characters. Kevin Janssens (he's annoying as hell), Veerle Baetens and Jeroen Perceval play these 'Johnny and Marina' kinda types which I loathe so it's almost impossible to care for them - let alone stand them. The titular 'Ardennes' are only featured almost an hour into the flick and it only lasts 93 minutes (incl credits). I can't recommend this film at all. I was thinking it would be a cool Flemish take on the cabin horror movies maybe, but it's nothing of the sort. Just skip this crap and watch Belgica, that one was cool and fun!

Hardcore Henry (2015)

About the closest thing to a live action game you'll ever see...but you can't play

[6/10 · 29 June 2016]

This movie is entirely shot in POV and about the closest thing to a live action game I ever saw. Though I wouldn't want to have been on the first row in the cinemas coz the camera shake is a extreme as the action (which can be pretty graphic at times). Look, if you're going to see a movie like this you know what you're getting. The story is nothing original and seems like cheap combination/ripoff of F.E.A.R. and Duke Nukem 3D (both excellent first person PC shooters). The acting varies from okay to horrendous (the bad guy is irritating as hell). Music wise we get some pop/rock songs, some in horrible Russian but it's safe to say you wont rush to your local store to but the soundtrack. The best part of the films are the gunfights and parcour-like running and jumping action. It's quite impressive they were able to pull all this off for a lousy 2m$. The VFX were done in open source Blender and the filming was done with GoPro Hero 3 camera's. Hardcore Henry is a testament to what you can do with affordable digital technology these days. Is it a good film? No. But it's braindead fun. You could compare it to Crank which was better, funnier and more over the top (which a film like this really needs to be). But I can imagine some people getting sick (literarily) from the 96 min POV violence fest. And it can be a bit like watching someone else play a game, but sometimes it's more fun to play yourself ;)

Warcraft (2016)

Visually impressive but slow and underdevelopped

[7/10 · 12 June 2016]

As far as computer game movies go it's one of the better ones, but as most game movie are total sh1t that isn't saying much... I had very high hopes for this one as the director is no one less then Duncan Jones, director of gems like 'Moon' and 'Source Code'. Jones also claims to be a Warcraft fan and the meaty 160m$ budget should alow to visualize most they can think of without monetary constraints. Well, first the good things: the movie looks pretty awesome. The cinematography is great, the colors and production design are very consistent with the game and the CGI Orcs (courtesy of ILM) are almost photoreal and neatly integrated into the live action footage. So an A+ for eye candy. But that's where the good news stops. The movie plot is just to thin for a 123 minute movie and there are so many scenes where nothing is happening. Characters are just talking their face off but they aren't saying anything useful or aren't advancing the plot. The characters themselves are rather shallow. Sometimes when they die you won't care one bit. The Orc Durotan and Garona are fleshed out the best, but the humans are one sad cardboard bunch. This as you can imagine makes the movie a bit boring and quite slow at times. There seems very little at stake and almost not tension buildup. Has Duncan Jones actually seen his own previous movies? Jones said this is supposed to be a franchise but it should have gotten a better start to keep people interested. If they make a sequel it will be for the Chinese I'm sure.

Look Who's Back (2015)

You're probably thinking it's like 'The Visitors' but with Hitler, well it's NOT

[7/10 · 1 June 2016]

The Real Hitler arrives in 2014. Should be funny. Like the movie The Visitors, but then with Hitler. A fish out of water kinda flick. Well it's NOT that kind of movie (well maybe just a little). This one tries to be more of a social commentary: it alludes to the rise of right wing parties (no alcohol required) and right wing sentiments among civilians fueled by the constant influx of Islamic immigrants and the (often not working) multicultural society. It suggests people would forget history all to easily and back a man (who they know is evil) simply because he can be quite convincing and opportunistically promises to finally do right by the people and clean up the place so to speak. I won't say it's left wing propaganda, but it certainly tips over that way in it's commentary and the filmmakers do have a point, we should not forget history all to easily but we should not ignore our problems either and hope they will simply go away but do something before it goes too far. Purely as a film I would say they could have done more with the subject. You could probably make an endless series of films about how it would be for Hitler in the 21st century, some more comical or dramatic then others. I would call 'Er est wieder da' a honorable try but it leaves potential on the table. I would say give it a go if the subject fancies your interest or if you just like films with Hitler in them, but know what to expect.

13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi (2016)

Patriotic, militaristic and too long

[6/10 · 29 May 2016]

The original cut of the film was 4 hours long. They 'managed' to cut it down to 145 minutes, the length that most Michael Bay films seem to have but it's still too long. Cutting another 25 minutes would have made it snappier. '13 Hours' is a rather patriotic flick about soldiers protecting a CIA compound in Libia after an ambassador is killed. The characters are not very properly introduced or fleshed out so you won't care much about them. They use a lot of military slang which might help to make it sound more authentic it also adds to the confusion. The battle scenes are in Bay's tradition filmed in a very chaotic fashion, sometimes it's difficult to see what's going on. In reality it probably was that way but it doesn't have to be for the spectators. All in all it's an okay film -I wasn't bored or anything- but it feels too patriotic (the word 'American' is used plenty) and military centric (the diplomats and chiefs come off as incompetent nerds while the soldiers save the day).

Black (III) (2015)

Talk about putting out the wrong message...

[4/10 · 30 April 2016]

Adil El Arbi seems hell-bent on putting migrants into bad daylight, or one would hope...because if this was a factual portrayal of these people we would be right to want them gone as soon as possible. As far as the story goes Adil just took the Romeo & Juliet template and changed some characters names, ethnicities and locations and voila, the script almost wrote itself. Really, this drains the film of almost any surprises coz we all know how that story went. That's just being lazy Adil... As a plus, I do have to say the movie is well shot. The camera-work and cinematography is pretty good. The music as you might have guessed is horrible, atrocious rap music, that's what the gangsta boys listen to innit. But we all know that this is the lowest form of music after Flemish Butcher songs right? So turn the sound off or watch with earplugs. And now for the biggest problem of the whole movie: the characters. These are the biggest bunch of violent, stealing, raping a-holes you would never want to associate with, live in the neighborhood off or even encounter in your lifetime. Normally you as a watcher should be able to sympathize with or at least root for the protagonists but this film makes that very difficult. The black girl is about the only one you can feel for but the rest of these mothers could not die fast enough for me. Just as in 'IMAGE' these migrant characters have nothing but contempt for each other (Blacks vs Moroccans) but most of all for the working class Flemish people. We seems to be the bottom of the barrel for them. That nukes all hope that integrating these people in our society will ever have a chance, or that is what this film is shouting to us in capital letters. Adding insult to injury: this film is financed partially by the VAF, but the only Flemish words spoken in this flick are curse words like 'klootzak', 'makkak', 'hoer', etc...money well spent VAF... So if you want to get royally p*ssed off watch this movie, if you want a couple of hours of solid entertainment watch Deadpool.

Deadpool (2016)

The anti-superhero superhero movie

[9/10 · 28 April 2016]

I was very curious about and eagerly awaiting to see this film as the reviews about this one were overly positive despite some criticism left and right. Well I can tell you right of the bat: this movie is fracking awesome! So the naysayers were dead wrong (pun intended). It was a very bold move putting the same actor who played a much despised version of Deadpool in X-Men Origins in a completely different movie. But they play it very smart: deadpool is a smart-mouth character and says basically everything what he (and the audience) is thinking. This makes for some very good jokes and the humor (though some might call it crude or a bit offensive) is just excellent and works great! As terrible as Reynolds was in Origins, here he embodies the character perfectly. The script is written very well and the director (a director and creative producer for CGI shortfilms and cinematics at Blur Studios) clearly understands the material and has knack for bringing it to the screen in the right way. You could say this is the anti-superhero superhero movie. After all the 'straight' superhero flicks of which we might have seen too many, this is a fresh breeze and welcome addition to the genre. So if you see one superhero movie this year see Deadpool. If you are sick of or hate superhero movies this is also right up your alley. Very highly recommended!

Rampage (2009)

Uwe cranks out another one and it's not good

[5/10 · 24 April 2016]

So a guy goes on a rampage and shoots everyone in sight. That part was kinda fun. But why did he do it? The first 20 minutes should give you an insight into the psyche of this maniac...oh, wait it's an Uwe Boll film, so the first 20 minutes the guy goes to fast food restaurants and nags about the cream on his café laté in the local coffee bar and does nothing else of interest. The camera work consists of the most shaky/wobbly hand-held shots I've seen since the Blair Witch project (that was actually a lot better). The camera operator must have come drunk to work each day is my guess. If there was music I did not notice or remember it. The acting is not good. The was actually no script but just a 10 page outline and the rest was improvised on set. And you can tell, coz the actors are blabbering over each others lines which Uwe must have thought made it more natural but it just becomes chaotic and irritating. The lead actor is a (small) dork who has a very stupid looking face (it's true, not kidding). The editing is not great (it uses lots of jump cuts but that's good, it keeps the film short) but the movie is fairly linear so it's hard to mess that up right. All in all not a terrible movie but it could have been much better with a capable director, decent actors and a well fleshed out script. Better next time Uwe!

The Plague Dogs (1982)

The World as a dark and hostile place

[7/10 · 24 April 2016]

It's from the director of 'Watership Down' so that should give you an idea of what you're in for. If you want to let your kids know what a dark, horrible and hostile place the world can be: let them watch this film (or Watership down). If you want them to be ignorant, happy saps who think the world is a colorful place where nothing bad can happen and everything will turn out okay let them watch a Disney flick. But I guess it can't hurt to see both sides, that'll teach 'em realism instead of naive positivism right. I admire that they didn't water down the film just to reach a larger audience. Unfortunately this second movie is also the last one this direct ever made.

Tyrannosaur (2011)

Not a fun movie but a very well made one

[7/10 · 24 April 2016]

Man, saying Tyrannosaur is not a happy movie is quite an understatement. The main character is a rude and unlikeable man who beat and mistreated his overweight wife (the titular Tyrannosaur, she's dead), has an extremely hostile attitude towards his environment and to top it off is a raging alcoholic. He comes across a religious upper-class woman who turns out to have some problems of her own. The film has a very bleak color palette matching the bleak outlook on life of most people in this story. Though I would not really recommend this movie as a must see, I do have to say that it is well made and acted for what it is. But what it is, is a dark depressing film about people living on the edge of society who have a different state of mind than average Joe. Still a better watch than most American Comedies these days.

Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon: Sword of Destiny (2016)

It does what films never should do: bore you!

[5/10 · 19 April 2016]

Netflix strikes again! This time they chose to ruin the memory of a the 16 year old classic Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon with a sequel that shines in being utterly boring. The film is only 100 mins long but it seems to last so much longer. The story is poorly constructed and there so little happening that halfway through the movie I hardly knew what is was about. Something about the titular sword, but it seems so unfocused and aimless. You never have the sense that the story is going anywhere or that the characters have some clear purpose. Also the characters are dull and the dialogue utterly uninspired. They did an effort to make it look good but strangely enough this film looks like a TV movie (well it actually is) that has this strong 'shot in a studio' look (much like War Horse for example). I didn't check the director before watching it but was very surprised Woo-Ping (action choreographer Matrix films) was at the wheel. So the action should at least be good right? Wrong, the fight scenes are slow and dull, not fast and furious. So I would recommend to skip this film entirely, certainly if you liked the original and want to keep your memory of it intact.

The Revenant (I) (2015)

A Cinematic Tour de force

[9/10 · 11 April 2016]

The Revenant really is a cinematic tour de force. The landscapes and vistas in this film are just gorgeous to look at but at the same time it's a very raw, gritty and gruesome experience. I think the Revenant puts a final stop to pointless arguments that 35mm film is better than digital cameras. Originally planned to be shot on film they decided to shoot 60% on Arri Alexa XT's and 40% on Alexa 65 (65mm size 6.5K sensor). The colors are vibrant but natural, and the play of light and darkness is sublime. Also the absence of film grain (an advantage of shooting digital) removes the veil between the audience and the captured images. I bet when this comes out on Ultra-HD in HDR that this will be a reference disc often used to demo the capabilities of those OLED flatscreens. Soundwise we're in for a treat as well. The rumbling of waterfalls, the roars of the bear and rustling of the wind through the trees is brilliantly mixed and mastered. There are 630 VFX shots in this film and I can tell you, you might spot a few but most are perfectly executed and absolutely invisible. The scene with the bear, might god...looks so real. As for the acting, an Oscar well deserved for Leo. And Tom Hardy is quite excellent as well. So a movie I very highly recommend, though it is as harsh as it is beautiful, it surely is one to put on the bucket list.