diafora17 Reviews

Divergent (2014)

An insult to human intelligence...

[1/10 · 23 July 2014]

Take a brilliant concept that reflects some possible future scenario - inspired by the marvelous Aldous Haxley's 'Brave new world' - add a twisted 'matrixinian, hunger games' wanna be variation from Veronica Roth - and finally make a Hollywood film out of it; what do you have? An insult to human intelligence.

The first 5 minutes of the film, focused on the essence. They where great. The rest of the long 2 hours where a bad mixture of the hunger games without the hunger, the matrix without mr Anderson, star treck without the stars, and dumb running, kicking, fighting, agonizing for no reason what so ever mambo jumbo.

Overall quality? No better than a B class TV series. So why 7.4 in IMDb? Surely can't tell (paid reviews I presume). So I give a one star to balance things out.

What is the message? In a future where mankind faces serious identity issues, where individuality is replaced by casts, where society is a threat to humanity... then what does one do??? Learn karate, pick up a gun and shoot the hell out of the bad guys!!! Wooaaoou! Totally mature and intelligent! I seriously prefer swangeneger's philoshopy 'Destroy da planat and get da hell oder heeer'.

Hollywood's intention: Insult humans to the degree they begin to like it. Make ridiculous films so that every one turns into TV shows. Then keep serving them insulting TV shows... they won't mind... they are 'brain dead' to quality and originality. Thank's Hollywood, I'll pass (next time at least, cause I wasted 2 hours+ watching this crap).

Noah (2014)

It surely was a HUGE FLOOD!

[4/10 · 7 July 2014]

Nope. Yes that's right, a big no no for this one.

How can a floating ark filled with $125 Million not sink? Lose the budget please, and those crappy digital effects that resemble student projects in Maya. PI (First feature film by Aronofsky) was a masterpiece - at $60.000 budget. Look at what money does to talent... oh my, it's a sure bet each and every time.

This film was surely a huge FLOOD. Gladiator that protects flowers but slays men; Rocky crappy digitized monsters with deep and serious voices to portray fallen angels; some thousand species marching towards the arc without ONE SINGLE CLEAR shot at them - they just seemed to be a swarm of 'something', or replicas of clay, crawling towards the arc. At some point you can distinguish something that resembled an Elephant...equivalent to the one that comes up if you type "Elephant 3D Maya tutorial" in YouTube.

Remember the Fountain, The wrestler, Black Swan and so on? Great films right?. OK, then you want to already forget this one. Don't mix up the previous filmography with Noah - the film is a disappointment to both the original story and to the great actors involved in it. Oh, yes, the actors. Was there any good acting involved? Hmm... let me put it this way: I think the actors where told they where making the planet of the Apes 4 right after being attacked by rocky transformers (they were obviously going to add the Apes digitally at post production). Then there was an apocalypse... it was not planet of the Apes, it was Noah. Did it make a difference? Nope.

If they kept the actors in the desert, portrayed no arc, showed no digital rocky monsters, no armies, no flood, but had them talk between themselves and to themselves - then perhaps, Aronofksy could stand up to the name he has built so far. But money, like sugar is always a sweet temptation - one that adds a certain weight around you and inside you. This burden of a flooded title.. never leaves a directors mind.

Clint Mansell, such a great music maker, what on earth was this? Did you just use your signature on the contract for this soundtrack? Even if you where inside an ark and everything was sinking around you you couldn't tolerate such Hollywood-ed flat, noisy, boring music. Come on!

Everyone is watching TV series those days. Standards are way to low. It's similar to supermarkets and fast food. Quality does not matter, only quantity. Our brains absorb any type of junk thrown into our consciousnesses. This perhaps marks an era similar to the one portrayed in the film. The decline of Hollywood. I presume each one of us must build his own arc, an arc of consciousness and protect whatever is precious to oneself. One must not lose ones identity and essence inside this flooded society of ours. One must preserve the quality of the thing that makes us great living beings (not just human beings).

Under the Skin (I) (2013)

Trying to resemble an 80's thriller, but was too boring to even do that

[2/10 · 27 June 2014]

I often ask myself: Why do we watch movies in the first place? What do they offer us? That question arises usually after a really good movie, or after a really bad one. This movie, unfortunately for me was a bad one.

I got carried away and watched it because other reviews called it a masterpiece. Come on, please, a masterpiece of depression, ugliness, loneliness, moodiness and boredom this was. You must be sick in the mind and in the heart to like this film, moreover call it a masterpiece.

Disturbing? Yes, in a sick way. Everything was ugly, dark, dead, without essence, a journey to the abyss of decay and misery. Why watch such images? Are people so disturbed to even tolerate films like this for entertainment? Or should we not call it entertainment, see it as depiction of reality, embrace the ugliness and so on? Because if one wants to be disturbed by reality, there are plenty of really disturbing stuff happening in the 'real' world around us everyday. So what is cinema? An escape? From what? Isolate oneself in a dark room and absorb all these images in one's consciousness; why, why does it have to look dark and ugly and violent to shake our minds?

Boring? Yes. Although the cinematic views and camera angles where really interesting (EU cinema fans will appreciate it), the plot was really slow, explained nothing and did not escalate. If one has not read the book or a synopsis, one would really find this whole moving around rather boring and without reason.

Acting? Hmm, let me put it this way: It was perhaps interesting to see such a beautiful actress being transformed into this depressing being that did not seem human. But if it was not for the famous name, the character was flat.

Filming style? Badly tried to resemble the 80's. The thing is that in the 80's, movies turned out to look cheap and B rated because of lack of budget, bad equipment, lack of acting potential, bad directors and so on. Why film like that today?

Music? Creepy but sophisticated. Synced nicely with the moody scenes.

Why give it a 2? Because by no means this is an 7.2 rating movie. It is more like a 4. Also because it polluted my consciousness with disturbing images that offered nothing to me. Ah, yes, and because it was boring and wasted 2 hours of my life watching this 'decay' of the human species.

Conclusion: Have you watched the Black Swan by Aronofsky? Because that was also dark and depressing but a real masterpiece, because it had essence, it talked to the heart. Under the skin was not a good movie (if you are a normal person and not sick in the mind).

The Last Days on Mars (2013)

Such a waste of talent and money...

[4/10 · 5 November 2013]

I spend most of the time watching this film trying to understand what's gone so wrong with it. You see these A class actors trying to act, and then the camera moves ridiculously, the cut's are all wrong, the plot seems to compete with an 80's flick, and you're just wondering what on earth (or on mars) is so wrong.

Schreiber, Garai and Williams do try to hold it together. But the rest of the cast is like the caterer stepped in the shot and was given a role. It makes you laugh. Then a Schreiber shot comes up and you are reminded that you are watching a film that must have some potential, right? Well, yes and no. (Next lines contain spoilers) - This zombie madness is becoming quite ridiculous these days - even on Mars??? Come on guys, what are you thinking? Where have all the science fiction screenwriters gone? I mean, you set up a 7.000.000 pounds film, you get some A class names there (I wonder how they signed up for that), and then you throw a couple of zombies to chase them around? Childish.

I have recently watched "Europa Report", another independent science fiction movie with a low budget. It was amazing - watch this instead. Europa Report's soundtrack has also become one of my favorites. Why do I compare? Because I was waiting for Prometheus for over a year, and it turned out to be 'mediocre' to 'disappointing'. Then I watched the last days on Mars and it was bad, then I recall watching "moon" with Sam Rockwell, and it rocked, super acting, super concept, just watch this instead. And so I say, size does not matter, but talent does, and you can't only rely on actors, you have to cook all ingredients properly for the food to come out tasty.

So unless you are fan of 80's scripts, where plot does not matter, where clumsy acting is considered a must, where, the director had too much chili last night, where the screenwriter watched to may episodes of 'walking dead'....then don't watch it. Sorry guys, I see it's your first full length film, and I appreciate the try, but why not try doing something that makes sense instead. Why do you pick such topic, where even Ridley Scott is having a hard time keeping up with his fans?

The Master (2012)

A masterpiece

[9/10 · 1 April 2013]

Simply wonderful. A masterpiece. The acting was superb. I've read a few critiques talking about a mediocre film. Then I watched it, and wow... I am just wondering, how can one criticize a diamond, waste his time looking for a scratch, for an imperfection on it's shinny surface. This film travels you down to the soul of human kind, to the very roots of the self. How can one meet this extraordinary thing called 'life'? Knowledge versus ignorance, simplicity versus complexity,belief versus doubt, the point where the future meets the past. Two lives meet at that point in space and time that one calls 'love'. It's a wired, mystical love that goes far beyond the surface, it moves inwardly, to the deepest fears and hopes of that 'intelligent' entity called 'human'.

Sound of My Voice (2011)

A very interesting film

[7/10 · 17 October 2012]

The script was really interesting and the whole approach to the mysterious character of Maggie (Brit Marling) escalated throughout the whole film. Her acting or more likely her whole 'aura' if I may use such a term, truly gave the "breath of life" to this movie.

The interesting part about this cult was that it was formed by a small circle of individuals, while the main figure claimed she was coming from the future. All the different personalities unraveled slowly and different motives, pasts, fears and doubts started coming out. The film didn't go too deep into that, but it was a good attempt. The main feeling about the mysterious background of Maggie (as well as that of the journalist and his girlfriend) was "doubt". The viewer travels through a palindromic sensation of losing or gaining "faith" on Maggie, and so did the two new members of the cult; it was also interesting to see that this back and forth in terms of "faith" was taking place between them too.

One point I didn't particularly like was that the cult didn't have a clear message. It was preparing the viewer for something that didn't come. On the other hand, one that supposedly comes from the future must have his own reasons for choosing you to be part of the inner circle, and no explanations are required. It's the knower against the ignorant. One that has seen, knows – but the ones' living in the past are obviously ignorant of the future, and therefore doubt arises. But to draw you own conclusions I recommend that you watch the film.

The camera is of rather low quality, but I suppose it's a low budget film. It could have gone deeper with the characters, although it all adds up nicely at the end.

So I recommend this film! If you are a Hollywood action type of viewer, or can't appreciate a lower budget film that builds on characters rather than visual effects,well...you know what to do. If you want to cultivate or learn to appreciate films that attempt to work with characters and their complicated personalities, then start with "sound of my voice". The title is beyond excellent I must say (at least for the ones that have ears to hear...)

A Fantastic Fear of Everything (2012)

This film is amazing, I consider it a cult that one must see.

[7/10 · 16 October 2012]

The script is intelligent, the direction is smart, the "camera move" is supreme and Simon Pegg's performance is outstanding. It's a black comedy with a rather 80's touch that renders the whole atmosphere so mystical and hysterical. The humor is totally "black" orchestrated with extreme behavioral moods, spastic grimaces, and unbelievable dream sequences that you'd love to watch over and over again. The character Simon Pegg is playing, is a kind of paranoid intelligent looser that is trapped between 2 worlds. The fears and insecurity he has carried over from the past (as a kid) have reached a point where they've become phobias, projecting outwardly in schizophrenic behavior. The character believes or rather is obsessed with the idea that he is going to be murdered. I am not going to say anything more about the plot as it's worth seeing it afresh.

This film captures some amazing ingredients of good black comedy films: mystical atmosphere, sound/music synchronization with sudden camera moves, funny faces (extreme), smart script, dream sequences and spontaneous direction. It's British humor, which I personally love, with a few deeper meanings (behind the whole phobia thing projected from a traumatized subconscious which tries to come to peace with the past).

Having read a few other reviews before watching it, I must say that I find it sad that people expect American style productions and high budgets in order to like a film. How rare good comedies are these days? I loved the film and if you like black comedy and other Simon Pegg's movies I suppose you'll at least like it, since it carries a cinematic seriousness in its humor.