Change Your Image
the_king17
Reviews
Hunting Grounds (2008)
Not worth watching
As a movie fan myself I was curious of this film. The average score and the positive earlier comments made me think this wasn't actually a really bad movie. However, I was quickly put back on earth again.
The graphics are bad. The film starts with a voice-over, which on itself is not one of the best features a movie can have as well as it is just one of the worst I ever heard. The setting is beyond low-budget and badly scripted (e.g. there's a scene in a pub in which we hear a lot of people drinking but actually the pub setting has really no people in it!). Next, the actors are bad, they sound like Russians who immigrated to France in their childhood and were only taught English just before the film. I stopped watching after, say, ten minutes. Waste of time!
The Last Dragon (2004)
All credits to the CGI, story implausible at least
Let me begin by saying I am a big fantasy fan. However, this film is not for me. Many far-fetched arguments are trying to support this film's claim that dragons possibly ever existed. The film mentions connections in different stories from different countries, but fails to investigate them more thoroughly, which could have given the film some credibility. The film uses (nice!) CGI to tell us a narrated fantasy story on a young dragon's life. This is combined with popular-TV-show-CSI-style flash-forwards to make it look like something scientific, which it is definitely not. In many cases the arguments/clues are far-fetched. In some cases, clues used to show dragons possibly existed, or flew, or spit fire are simply invalid. To see this just makes me get cramp in my toes. Even a fantasy film needs some degree of reality in it, but this one just doesn't have it. Bottom line: it's a pretentious fantasy-CSI documentary, not worth watching.
Dnevnoy dozor (2006)
One of few good surrealistic fantasy
This is a sequel of "Nochnoi Dozor" (English: Night Watch), the first part of a trilogy on the ever-lasting fantasy battle Good versus Evil, called here Light and Dark, respectively. Beware: the episodes of this trilogy are hard to watch on their own.
"Dnevnoi Dozor" (English: Day Watch), set in Moscow, continues on Nochnoi Dozor, in which the main character, Anton -who chose to join the Light-, protects a boy who would become a Great One, someone mentioned in the prophecy that could decide the battle of Light versus Dark by joining either of them, out of free will. At the same time, the Night Watch (Light side) has to deal with a curse a virgin brought into the world.
In Devnoi Dozor, the boy lives with the Day Watch (Dark side) where he learns the Dark side is not that evil, but just human. The film begins with the warrior Tamarlan finding the Chalk of Destiny, a thousand years ago. Then we switch to Moscow present time, where Anton and the virgin Svetlana are patrolling for the Night Watch. They are researching the Chalk, and decide they need it in the battle with the Dark side. To prevent the boy from choosing the Dark side Anton wants to use the Chalk to change destiny.
---- The film is straight-forward, the time-line is continuous. There are no big plot-turns, the thrill is created by fast paced mind-boggling scenes (racing car driving vertically along a building) and well composed soundtracks. The plot consists of Anton trying to change destiny in favor of the Light. A sub plot is Anton being accused of murder, because of which he could be sent to the Inquisitors. Another sub plot is the impossible relation Alisa, a main person of the Day Watch, is trying to fix she has with Kostya, a vampire of the Dark side.
The theme obviously is the battle of good versus evil, which is a proved theme for fantasy stories. Some motives are flashlights (Light in the darkness), the Chalk (history changes as it is written), destiny (which the Chalk can change), free will (Light and Dark can't force people to join them, and the Chalk can't change free will), name Anton (meaning "worthy of praise"), name Svetlana (meaning "star" e.g. the Light), innocence (innocent people don't need to change destiny).
Characters: Anton: Main character, he wants to fix everything himself. Svetlana: Main character, she develops hate-love relations with Anton. Olga: she is a sorcerer for the Light ones. Egor: the boy who has to choose between Dark and Light. Alisa: wants to fix an impossible love relation. The characters are quite flat, the personalities don't really evolve. Except for Svetlana, who first hates Anton but then gets very close to him.
Although the theme nor the plot is very spectacular, the cam-work, the editing, the special effects and the soundtracks more than make up for it. There are true astonishing scenes, original effects (a 'jump' into a poster, through the Dusk, resulting in a 'jump' out of a billboard some place else. Or Tamarlan attacking the temple, which scene could easily compete with some of the best of Japanese / Chinese cinematography).
---- Concluding: If you are a fan of Action-Fantasy with capital A and F, in combination with mythological and ethic elements -like The Matrix- you should watch this movie definitely. I give it 9/10 (which should out-rate the prequel)
The Village (2004)
Well directed at first sight, brilliant when examined.
This motion picture begins with Mr. Nicholson burying his son, after which the viewer is taken to the ceremonial dinner. As strange sounds come from the woods, only one person, the stupid, gets excited. Then skinned animals being are found. They are firstly said to be killed by coyotes. And that 'those we don't speak of', who keep the villagers from going in the woods surrounding the village, didn't go angry on them. However, some youngsters want to go through the woods to get medicines in towns nearby.
Many, many mysteries live in this remote, 19th century village. Red being the forbidden color and yellow the protective color is one of them. What exactly keeps the villagers from going through the woods is another. As are the skinners, and the colors the blind girl actually can see. And of course, the whole 'why' the village is there. Two young men seem to know things. One of them, the stupid, doesn't really care. The other, Lucius, still has to figure out a lot, but he obviously suspects things. But he gets silenced in an attempt of murder. Piece-by-piece the viewer is fed solutions, but he/she is not always given a clear picture.
----- This thriller/detective is chronological and uses few flash-backs to illustrate some monologues of characters. The director attempts to build up the thrill by various means: well utilized sounds, nice cam-work and editing (e.g. as Ivy stands in the door waiting for Lucius, or, as Ivy runs into the barrier), and slow and slightly static but splendidly teasing plot.
As in a good thriller/detective the viewer is offered fake solutions, e.g. at some moment it is said 'those we don't speak of' are not real, but in a later scene we actually see one of them in the woods.
The theme is the distancy of the village. The viewer must find out why. The motives are: fear (of the outside world), supernaturalness (the view of blind Ivy), knowledge (who are 'those we don't speak of'), red (bad color), yellow (good color), innocence (of the villagers), secrets ( 'sometimes we don't do things we want to do so that others won't know we want to do them'), 'Lucius' (Lat., 'lux', light; as in he sees what others don't), 'Noah' (Hebr. 'rest' / wanderer, as in he wanders where others don't, he's locked up at some point "Lord shut him in" (Gen.7:16). This name is a bit fague, but as is the character), the innocent 19th century (one can read '1840' on a gravestone in the opening scene)
Main characters: Lucius, seems a distant man at first but turns out to be close to Ivy; Ivy, blind but she can see aura's, she's afraid but she withstands her fear and eventually outsmarts her fear; Noah, he's retarded but that wouldn't justify his stunning actions; Mr. Walker, father of Ivy, head of village, he knows it all, at first he's not willing to sacrifice his secrets but when he does, it turns out not to harm them. The characters are round, they have true emotions and they develop them as the movie progresses.
------ Concluding, this tribute to innocence in combination with deep mystery and although having a slightly simple plot it's a worthy thriller. However I would agree with "cozzymo2". The movie would've been even better when the big revelation was postponed. The viewer should not know the truth until it's almost too late. Personal grade: 7/10
King Arthur (2004)
..it's quite entertaining
This is a telling of Arthur the Roman who became Arthur, King of the Brits.
The story's set in GB, during winter. The Romans pull back, but one group of recruited Samaritans, led by Arthur, must go on a last quest before they can be free men: they must save an outpost.
The group has an attitude towards the romans, nonetheless they kill their own people. However as they discover the romans at the outpost are really inhumane (towards their own people) they decide to cooperate with their own people again to fight the saxes, who are intruding their lands.
The storyline is absolutely chronological and has no climax or sudden plot-turns. The movie starts with Lancelot telling the story of his getting recruited, which then is abandoned.
The motives are the quest for the outpost and the defeat of the saxes. Another (less obvious) motive is the pagan knights arguing gods and beliefs, although the pagan group is loyal to it's Christian/roman leader. The most characters are flat, they do not show (emotional) progression in personality, some of the main characters don't even have a clear personality. If one must define the characters one could discover the pagan, the funny killing giant, the leader and the flirter.
The theme of the movie is loyalty, arthur wants to die for his followers, the group turns out to be loyal to it's own country, and together they fight the foe.
The movie is for a great deal a big fight, however Arthur, a decorated roman commander comes up with no special tactics.
Conclusion: Although this warriors' saga has no gore or significant genialities, and there too many things that haven't had much thought on it, it's quite entertaining. Personal rating: 6/10