tempestnam Reviews

The Duellists (1977)

This should be ranked much higher

[9/10 · 24 December 2009]

Unlike films of critical acclaim like "The GodFather" or "The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly" - this classic movie goes completely unnoticed by the Public.

I don't know how to explain the 7.4, I can't find fault with this film as to why one would rate it that low other than the budget didn't allow for the same Epic making of other classic films. Or maybe the ambiguous ending, but to me the ending made perfect since for both the main characters personalities.

Without a doubt the best sword fighting scenes I have ever seen in a movie. Pirates of the Caribbean has nothing on this. The scenes look entirely natural (not CGId or seemingly choreographed, but what real sword fighting might be like...at times elegant, at times sloppy merely surviving) I think a difference is many people give films like The Godfather, The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly, the 10 out of 10 nod because EVERYONE does. Without objectively viewing and determining the film for themselves they believe it is great. This film is just as good as those films and on a much smaller budget.

Che: Part One (2008)

About as good as you get without recognition...

[9/10 · 24 December 2009]

Both parts of this series were ridiculously good IMO. They were directed, acted, written, researched with what seems bordering on obsession of perfection.

That being said...why the hate? It seems this is about as good a film you can make and not get any academy recognition for it. We're more than happy to reward the standard George Clooney acting genius that rivets us (Syriana, Micheal Clayton, Up in the the Air), the display of excessive violence and insanity (There will be Blood) or the Tragic Heartfelt Love that overcomes poverty (Slumdog Millionaire) But for some reason, we seem unwilling to reward movies that are superbly made simply because WE personally don't find their message appealing to our emotions.

This story is told almost flawlessly. The only movie I can think of that accomplishes their story better is the Shawshank Redemption.

The look into Che is also a contrast to American assumptions (especially today when everyone is clamoring about how we're becoming a communist state)

G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra (2009)

Too many good reviews

[4/10 · 24 December 2009]

Delivers exactly what it promises? Who are these reviewers who give points for a movie being what it is? THE WHOLE POINT OF MOVIES IS TO MAKE PEOPLE BELIEVE.

You can't sit there and say the point of the movie is to be mindless entertainment when it has a 170 million dollar budget. It's a good example of how to spend 170 million dollars on cool special effects. Just like TF2.

Especially when it DOESN'T present itself as mindless entertainment. It tries (pointlessly) to deliver a message, have mystery, be funny, etc. This movie had even more ridiculous lines than TF2. The dialogue is handsdown #1 worst of the year.

Waltz with Bashir (2008)

Good, but not best of year

[8/10 · 24 December 2009]

Don't get me wrong, this IS a good movie. But not a great movie. The Story telling is the best part, but you don't intimately connect with the Characters. Partly because the way the animation was done was purposely with metaphors and hyperbole. It makes it surreal so the real characters are kept at a distance from the viewer.

Yes, there's a strong emotional message about genocide. But that's not particularly gripping. Actually, I think that misses the message of the movie.

Which is the minds ability to block out and even change our actual memories.

Confessions of a Shopaholic (2009)

Story line was just poor

[4/10 · 27 November 2009]

I like Isla Fisher. She was especially good in Definitely, Maybe.

And she performed adequately here.

The real issue is the main crux of the whole conflicted, distressed damsel.

So, it's so wrong that she's writing an advice column about financial responsibility because she is financially irresponsible??? Frankly, being mad about this on the part of the editor is not believable.

Especially given the fact that financial advisers (especially in most asset markets) are often more wrong than right but are still given lots of respect.

Heck, everyone in the world treats Goldman Sachs like they are investing gods. Yet they lost their investors money same as every other firm in this downturn. And those who are actually their clients are getting even more ripped off because they charge them outrageous service fees...yet people line up to give them money.

So yeah, I don't see that the main underlying plot that the guy she likes will be so unbelievably mad at her for not coming clean about her personal life. Big deal.

It was mildly funny, but the ridiculousness of the plot made me not like it.

Observe and Report (2009)

Wow, it took Seth Rogen two years to become entirely unfunny...

[3/10 · 27 November 2009]

Usually it takes years and years before you become Adam Sandler or say any other SNL star who is given the benefit of the doubt for entirely too long.

Seth Rogen has managed it in two years.

Coming from the "Freaks and Geeks" brilliance and coupling those alums into Knocked Up was great, along with Superbad.

But this movie is entirely unfunny. I simply quit watching it about 1 hour in. The biggest turn off was the music...

Completely out of place. I mean every single song was entirely off. I hope Seth didn't pick them himself...if so, he should get a new music sense. Unless he was listening to advice from Oprah or someone...in which case, just hang yourself Seth.

State of Play (2009)

Definitely a mystery worth finding out...

[9/10 · 4 September 2009]

I really liked this movie. I haven't seen a good conspiracy, political thriller in a while. This is up there with movies like "The Pelican Brief" "L.A. Confidential" in the political thriller realms.

I thought Helen Mirren gave one of her best performance on film that I can recall. As much as I think Ben Affleck can be a raging tool, his acting was also very good. The entire cast was well acted. And I think the director understood how important acting was to carry the story lines thru this film.

Yes, there is suspense, yes there is some action, but any good mystery requires actors who make you believe in the mystery.

My only criticism is the ending flipped some new twists out of no where about 3 times. It was good, but you had a feeling of "Oh, we found out the mystery..." And then..."Oh, that's the mystery...." and then..."Oh I finally get it." And the final ending doesn't really provide resolution of if the got Pointcorp, or if it fell apart because of the story on the Senator. Why did the Senator get arrested? You have to draw the conclusion he was ordering the containment??? But it seems like he just didn't know the guy would do what he did.

I appreciated all the conflicts in the film too. There was the conflict of an aging paper and the internet, an old reporter and a new young gun, what takes precedence in news? Thrills, or real earnest reporting. What's moral? Just getting the story, or maintaining a friendship.

So there's a lot more to this film than just the mystery itself. I wish more films developed characters this way. They seem to focus so much on trying to show us the story at the cost of maybe exploring these other directions.

The Informers (2008)

Could use a better title...

[5/10 · 3 September 2009]

I don't know what that title would be. But "The Informers" is not a good title.

Every single one of these characters is caught up in the 1980s "beautiful" and "shallow" culture that came about. Remember, the 70s were an ugly, dark time in America. The 80s pasted make up on everything and gave birth to Beauty. I think the point of the film is trying to show what was beneath all this. It also tries to use Alejandro González Iñárritu's intersection style.

His trilogy, Amorres Perros, 21 Grams, and Babel is all a study of how we intersect in each others lives but rarely ever see the full results. Things that are common place daily never reveal to us the final ending. This film tries to do that...but badly. That's where Micky Roarkes character comes from. The Bellhop knows the kids, his uncle used to work for the Grahams dad. Kim Basinger is sleeping with Frosty. Etc, etc.

The problem is the independent stories aren't connected to the main story at all. The father and son in Hawaii has nothing to do with anything. The kidnapped kid really has nothing to do with anything.

The theme really is as someone else said. AIDs. But the problem is, AIDs is not in the side stories. The girl didn't sleep with any of those guys. You could say "blood" connections. Metro cuts himself, blood. The guy dies at the beginning and wipes blood on Graham. At the end, the bellhop cuts himself and wipes blood on his face.

But as you can see even from what I'm writing above. The story has no real plot, my review is almost aimless because the movie has no string to connect it all the way thru.

The one thing I liked was how clean it made LA look. I found the shots and cinematography to be shot very well.

Adventureland (2009)

Good story of younger and better times

[8/10 · 2 September 2009]

Having to sift thru the Slew of Apatow/Freak and Geeks Alumni movies these days can be demanding.

I'm just waiting for Busy Phillips and Linda Cardellini (who looks like a caricature of herself...surgery much?) to get in on the action.

In all Honesty, this is not truly a comedy. It's at heart a love story to be sure. In fact, I rarely laughed in this movie. However, I did appreciate the more thoughtful dialogue, which is funny in its own way.

Ryan Reynolds didn't make much sense though in the role he played. He was the biggest name in the film, played a bit part, and was not funny (which he typically is funny).

One off part I saw was many of these kids behave like teenagers are expected to behave...but they are all college age students. In particular, the two main characters are both ready to go to Grad school (so probably 22) but have very naive characteristics, like you would expect from characters like the ones in Superbad.

It doesn't mesh well with the proposed idea that these are mature characters with deep sense of values, which they all reveal they are at one point or another.

That being said, the story arc is very good, it's told very well, and the movie doesn't come across boring or slow in nearly any part I can detect. There's a sense of finding true love and perhaps the awkward youth we all experience.

I'm out...I can't believe some reviewers length here. Are you getting paid? Jesus, get to the point guys, it's not "Crime and Punishment" you're not that good.

Surveillance (I) (2008)

Ruined by the ending....

[3/10 · 2 September 2009]

This movie was *good* relatively during the first parts of it.

We have a story, from 3 points of view. So let's find some clues and complete the story.

Oh wait...none of that stuff matters because the FBI guys are the bad guys! Though that was a great twist...it was almost a terrible twist. I immediately downgraded the film from a 7 maybe 8 to 3 based on the last 10-15 minutes of it.

Does anyone else not see why the twist is so bad? Yes, it's a good shock. But it is bad because it has absolutely nothing to do with the preceding hour and twenty minutes. There's no connection to the killers.

The killers are in about all of 5 minutes of this movie (as killers) and the two FBI agents are only in 15 minutes of the previous hour and twenty.

We get it...surveillance...Oh, the Killers are voyeurs. WHICH MAKES NO SENSE, because they were only described in limited terms as just being psychopaths. And the hour and twenty minutes of surveillance we are watching of the 3 stories goes out the window as everyone is dead in 5 minutes.

All of this makes the ending even more ridiculous. Oh, they killed a bunch of FBI agents in the beginning...what FBI agents sleep together? All in the same room. To be found and murdered by amateurs and then impersonated by people who know nothing about being FBI agents? A cop 3 feet away apparently can't hit either one with a standard police issue pistol that can shoot several shots. I hate movies that try to make you feel like this could be real when they make absurd leaps they think we will believe.

The other thing is the movie ends about 10-15 minutes after they are revealed as the killers with a girl standing in the field somewhere...

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (2009)

Just an average blockbuster...

[5/10 · 9 July 2009]

Yes, these do happen. Tons of them exist. Movies can make 100s of millions and be just average movies (or even technically bad movies) Pirates of the Caribbean: At Worlds End, Matrix Revolutions, The Phantom Menace, Indiana Jones: Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.

The only people rating this 8 and above are looking just for cool special effects and action. And that's fine. But the majority have spoken. Most of us want something beyond just that. We want good acting (after all our money is paying actors millions), we want a good story, character development, etc.

None of those things exist in this movie.

Let's look at Michael Bays Body of work here. Tell me what Oscar monsters or Great 10 out of 10 movies are in there.

Bad Boys, Bad Boys II, The Rock, Armageddon, Pearl Harbor, The Island.

There's a theme here. And it's not Great movies or Oscar winners. It's "I will show the American Public Mindless Cool Special Effects, get relatively good actors to believe I'm making something, and get paid to show my child like directing abilities" I'm sure Will Smith, Sean Connery, Ed Harris, Ben Affleck, Nick Cage, Josh Hartnet, Alec Baldwin, John Voight, Bruce Willis, Billy Bob Thorton, Scarlett Johanson, Ewen McGregor all look at these movies as their best work.

Are some of these movies "Good" - Relatively. I mean yes, some are cool, kinda funny, and have some semi-interesting stories.

How with 4 straight directing Bombs, the Transformers folks fell on Michael Bay as their savior is beyond me. Armaggedon 1 out of 5, Pearl Harbor 2 out of 5, Bad Boys II 1 out of 5, The Island 1 1/2 out of 5. But hey...most of his movies make "some" money. (Though Bad Boys II and The Island were both considered commercial failures) On the Acting Alone, you have to deduct 2 if not 3 on a 10 point system. There's no character development of the Transformers...and that's vitally necessary as they are the main characters. You don't see Pixar movies not developing their animated characters.

Shaia Lebuff is a "good", young, talented actor. But it's mostly potential at this point. Megan Fox we can all agree has the acting range of string cheese. Honestly, how did this girl say "I don't want a career like Angelina Jolie" - What you mean a beautiful woman, successful actress, Oscar Winner, Nominated, etc, etc. Complete Acting Range. I mean talk about talented, look over that woman's career. Acting range is ridiculous, she's played pretty much everything.

You mean a career like that Megan? Or one where they tell you to just shut up and look hot? Don't forget Tyrese, you all know he's a giant. My other deduction comes from the story telling, which was just terrible. The plot wasn't bad, it was the execution, which falls on the director, so what did we expect.

Drag Me to Hell (2009)

Really? Am I this out of touch?

[1/10 · 11 June 2009]

I consider myself an avid movie goer. Not only that, but I try to watch many, many films from all different genres in different time periods.

I thought this movie was terrible. It was not scary even in the slightest. Comparing it to Evil Dead, IMO, is a complete disservice. Bruce Campbell was the perfect character for the off the wall humor, non-scary, horror style.

The difference is, this movie is trying to be scary. They are not purposely making a joke. They were trying to make this a serious, scary, well acted movie. It's not a satire, I see a lot of people posting in that thought.

A floating hanker-chef? Are you serious? And they do try to make even that scary, by it suddenly flying on the screen, and with a sudden tone in the music.

Story line was bad, Justin Long is the completely wrong actor for the role he was playing, every single thing that is trying to be scary just turns out so bad that it's funny.

I guess you could give it that, it's so terrible that it's funny.

The ending? OK...I'll bite. What did she shove down the old ladies throat? You could clearly see the envelope she was holding had a circular object in it (a button one assumes) but yet at the end, *SHOCK* she dies! The movie was more vile than anything else. Going for shock humor by having the old lady be ridiculously disgusting and spilling various liquids mouth to mouth to the young lady thru out the film.

Everyone in the movie theater panned it. The one I was in. That's why it grossed 7 mil on the opening...cause it stunk!