Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 129

Thread: Lord Rahl's Cinematic Review Repository

  1. #1
    Lord Rahl's Avatar Behold the Beard
    Content Emeritus

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The stars at night are big and bright!
    Posts
    13,779

    Default Lord Rahl's Cinematic Review Repository

    Lord Rahl's Cinematic Review Repository

    I have written a lot of movie reviews over the years since Facebook added the Flixster app to rate and review movies. After writing my most recent, I thought I might have my own thread in here for others to read my reviews and comment on them. What I mean by that is I wish for y'all to understand just how good my taste in movies is and why they're superior to yours. What I mean by that is I am a pretentious.

    Other than the bombardment of reviews that I'll post shortly after beginning this thread, I'll most likely post reviews semi-regularly. I don't go to see movies too often because I don't like spending my hard-earned money on movies that I don't think are going to be excellent (in most cases). Some things to understand about me before reading my reviews is I like movie that are truly good movies as well as those that are truly bad. Let's be honest with ourselves. We men (well, some of us are men) don't watch Death Wish 3 or buy The Expendables because they're actually good movies. We go to see them because they'll be fun to watch. I can watch bad movies and enjoy them from time to time but usually I prefer a movie that's actually good. That primarily requires the plot to make sense and for the movie to have well written dialogue. Unfortunately, it seems like more and more movies have terrible plots and poor dialogue. Some of you may know that I love Star Trek so don't be shocked if I have a favorable bias for movies in the franchise. I also have an obsession with Nicolas Cage. He's a god among actors and for all of you who think he's one of the worst actors to exist...you're all idiots. Enough about that.

    Just so y'all know, my reviews won't be written like most professional reviews. They're usually more rants than anything else unless I really liked the movie where I'll then give it more respect when reviewing it. I'll be adding my own personality into what I write. Also, some of my reviews WILL CONTAIN SPOILERS so read at your own risk. If anyone would like for me to post a review to a movie that I have saved then feel free to ask if I have one. I welcome any movie talk, actually.


    ________________________________________________

    Reviews

    Thor (2011)
    Season of the Witch (2011)
    Splice (2009)
    Casino Royale (2006)
    Defiance (2008)
    Avatar (2009)
    Watchmen (2009)
    Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979)
    Drive Angry (2011)
    The Road (2009)
    District 9 (2009)
    THX 1138 (1971)
    Patton (1970)
    Inception (2010)
    Conan the Barbarian (2011)
    The Debt (2011)
    The Fog of War (2003)
    Drive (2011)
    Inglourious Basterds (2009)
    Children of Men (2006)
    Titanic (1997)
    The Grey (2012)
    X-Men: First Class (2011)
    102 Minutes That Changed America (2008)
    The Cabin in the Woods (2012)
    Last edited by Lord Rahl; April 22, 2012 at 05:58 AM.

    Patron of: Ó Cathasaigh, Major. Stupidity, Kscott, Major König, Nationalist_Cause, Kleos, Rush Limbaugh, General_Curtis_LeMay, and NIKO_TWOW.RU | Patronized by: MadBurgerMaker
    Opifex, Civitate, ex-CdeC, Ex-Urbanis Legio, Ex-Quaestor, Ex-Helios Editor, Sig God, Skin Creator & Badge Forger
    I may be back... | @BeardedRiker

  2. #2
    Lord Rahl's Avatar Behold the Beard
    Content Emeritus

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The stars at night are big and bright!
    Posts
    13,779

    Default Re: Lord Rahl's Cinematic Review Repository

    Thor (2011)



    I was at least a bit optimistic about Thor. I've already become tired of comic book movie after comic book movie coming out, with many more on the way, that are mostly trash...so I was pessimistic about the movie as well. I thought that perhaps Branagh would make a more unique comic book movie because of his Shakespeare history. And being a Star Trek fan, I liked Chris Hemsworth's limited but great role as James T Kirk's father in 2009's Star Trek. Did I forget to mention Natalie Portman is in it?

    Before I say any more, I wish to say that I have not read any Thor comics. The beginning is a bit interesting with Thor's literal lightning and thunder (and clouds and dust and a lot of pretty SFX) arrival on Earth. Hell, I'll get run over by Natalie Portman any day if that gets to close to me. Anyway, once Thor arrives the audience is presented with long introduction to Asgard and Thor's history so we can know what the heck this Thor guy, oh sorry, god, is all about. Now, I must disagree with a lot of people about the look of Asgard. I didn't like it at all. The design was...OK I guess, but it's all too obviously CGI. I'm all for the use of CGI if it looks believable to me. That usually means minimal use if it can be helped. Except for a few examples, the audience will always be able to tell what is real and what is CGI. Did Asgard look pretty? Yes. Did it look like something fantastic (in the truest sense of the word)? Yes. Did it look real? No. So, I wasn't too impressed with Asgard. I didn't think the CGI was that great either, but that could be Branagh's fault in some ways.

    We get to see Thor almost become the king of Asgard. Some of his arrogance is displayed that is a personality that gets him banished from Asgard to Earth. I really wish they had developed Thor's personality more. Sure, he's arrogant but why should I care about him? Because he's the main character? Because he worked out a lot, got huge muscles, is a handsome guy, and all of the girls are going to orgasm from simply viewing his visage?

    Next comes Thor's friends. I forgot their names...because they're forgettable characters. You've got the dude who has weird hair, an out of place mustache (that means his mustache should have been in a Three Musketeers movies instead of one where he's supposed to be a Norse god), and fights with a...rapier (WTF)?! Then you've got the chick with the shield and Ray Stevenson as the guy who ate too much and fought with an axe. I wish they had just replaced his character with his Titus Pullo character in Rome. And did I mention the Asian dude? Why is there an Asian Norse god and why does he have to be so obviously Asian? Look, I understand they wanted some diversity in the movie so every single person wasn't white...but it's a movie about NORSE gods. Adding in a random Asian guy to add diversity and do some martial arts is just stupid. The movie has a badass black dude who's the gatekeeper of sorts but I didn't understand why he was chosen as that character either, though he did an good job of it and was actually one of the more interesting characters in the movie.

    One of the main problems with Thor is how predictable it is. I'm not expecting some great story from a comic book movie but after seeing several of them already it's getting tiresome. I felt like I could predict every line while watching. What happened to creative writing where it sounds like the characters have a mind of their own? If I can predict what everyone is going to say and do then why should I buy into their characters? Watching the trailers doesn't help either. If you remember the Thor trailers then you've basically seen all that makes up the movie. All of the jokes and action sequences were something I felt I had already seen so nothing sparked my interest. That is a problem with a lot of movies, though. Often watching one or two trailers will be the highlights of the film, thus making the actual film unsurprising.

    How was the action? The action was alright. In the big battle the frost giants the action was difficult to comprehend with quick edits. Things just went too fast. I found Thor's friends' fighting lacking too. I mean, Thor's got this huge hammer that can he can throw around and it'll fly back in his hand. It can knock down and kill a dozen frost giants in one throw, call down powerful lightning, and he can freaking fly too! His friends...just kind of fight with superhuman strength and different weapons. Titus Pullo's got an axe (that is actually like two axes right next to each other and defeats the whole purpose of an axe), the Asian's got a spiked mace, the musketeer has a rapier (it's interesting why a Norse god would use a ~17th century weapon), and the chick has a shield and sword. Loki had the ability to create a sort of hologram of himself. I'm not sure what his weapon was when fighting the frost giants. Did he throw stuff? Anyway, Thor was the only one who actually seemed like he was a god and that's one reason why the action was only mediocre. Other than Thor the action was like any normal fight scene involving melee weapons except the quick edits and over use of SFX made the action difficult to understand. Later on when Thor and his buddies fight the Destroyer, it's basically just a bunch of SFX and everyone jumping out of the way of the Destroyer's laser beam (or whatever it is). Also, Thor somehow is able to sneak into the S.H.I.E.L.D. camp made around Thor's hammer and beat up over a dozen guys...but whatever.

    How was the acting? Overall I'd say it was decent. Hemsworth, Hopkins, and Hiddleston are the highlights. Portman is excellent at being hot. Everyone else is entirely forgettable, especially Jeremy Renner's weird "cameo" as Hawkeye that served no purpose whatsoever. I really wish Hemsworth and Portman had more to work with as far as script goes. They didn't have much to do. Idris Elba was a badass and I thought he was one of the more memorable characters. Colm Feore's character didn't do anything more than have an evil look and say evil lines. His role in the Chronicles of Riddick was much more entertaining.

    Another point to make is that the character development of Thor didn't really work for me. He goes from arrogant to...helping make breakfast for humans? I understand that he was supposed to become humble and therefore care for everyone else but what happened to him still having a cool personality? I liked it when he threw his empty coffee cup on the ground and demanded another drink. That's what he should have done when he went to the bar! Loki's development was much more interesting.

    I apologize if it seems like I'm ripping this movie - trust me that I could go on much longer - but it's easy to rip a movie that I was very unimpressed with. It's a movie I've seen before in the numerous comic book movies that have been made and will be made. This is, in some ways, me ripping all of these Marvel movies that have come out and will come out. Was Thor terrible? No, it just wasn't that good. The characters were uninteresting for the most part, the acting not too impressive because of the boring script, the SFX hit and miss, the action confusing, the climax...anti-climactic, etc. I wanted Branagh to bring something new and fresh to comic book movies but you'd never be able to tell he directed it if you didn't know he did. Thor was just too generic to applaud. I think the only thing that impressed me was Hemsworth's physique.

    And finally, please get naked Natalie Portman.

    3/5 Stars
    Last edited by Lord Rahl; February 09, 2012 at 08:28 PM.

    Patron of: Ó Cathasaigh, Major. Stupidity, Kscott, Major König, Nationalist_Cause, Kleos, Rush Limbaugh, General_Curtis_LeMay, and NIKO_TWOW.RU | Patronized by: MadBurgerMaker
    Opifex, Civitate, ex-CdeC, Ex-Urbanis Legio, Ex-Quaestor, Ex-Helios Editor, Sig God, Skin Creator & Badge Forger
    I may be back... | @BeardedRiker

  3. #3
    God's Avatar Shnitzled In The Negev
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Wales
    Posts
    5,992

    Default Re: Lord Rahl's Cinematic Review Repository

    I thought it was ok, but not that great. Don't really understand the high praise for it on rotten tomatoes. I agree it was predictable and his character development didn't really work that well. And I've forgotten his friends completely haha.

  4. #4
    Lord Rahl's Avatar Behold the Beard
    Content Emeritus

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The stars at night are big and bright!
    Posts
    13,779

    Default Re: Lord Rahl's Cinematic Review Repository

    Agreed. Like I said, I was ripping the movie a lot, but frankly it had a lot of problems and doesn't deserves as much praise as it's getting. If I am truly impressed by a movie then I'll rant about how it worked. Thor didn't work and so it had me ranting about how why. A few friends of mine said it was "funny"...but was there really that much humor in it? I laughed genuinely maybe a few times. I do remember a number of jokes but none of them were really good.

    Let me add another review...

    Patron of: Ó Cathasaigh, Major. Stupidity, Kscott, Major König, Nationalist_Cause, Kleos, Rush Limbaugh, General_Curtis_LeMay, and NIKO_TWOW.RU | Patronized by: MadBurgerMaker
    Opifex, Civitate, ex-CdeC, Ex-Urbanis Legio, Ex-Quaestor, Ex-Helios Editor, Sig God, Skin Creator & Badge Forger
    I may be back... | @BeardedRiker

  5. #5
    Lord Rahl's Avatar Behold the Beard
    Content Emeritus

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The stars at night are big and bright!
    Posts
    13,779

    Default Re: Lord Rahl's Cinematic Review Repository

    Season of the Witch (2011)


    Even as a big fan of Cage and watching his hilariously bad movies this one was embarrassing to watch. Trust me, if the movie is that bad to where *I* say it was embarrassing then you should know without a doubt that spending your hard-earned dinero to watch the movie would be a bad decision. Like many movies he's done Season of the Witch was horrible because of...the movie it was. I don't know if the director would be able to have me interested in a movie with beautiful breasts in it every 5 seconds. OK, that's an exaggeration. I guess I'm so bored with movie cliches, and this one had a butt-load of horror and action cliches, that nothing in it was entertaining (except for Pearlman's humor). But God, the WRITING was some of the worst I think I've ever heard. Any actor would have looked terrible if they had to speak the same lines as Cage did.

    Sometimes I wonder why people go and see some of Cage's bad blockbusters (even though this can't be considered one). Well, excluding my buddies and I who saw the movie to get a laugh, someone should have seen how many people were there to see the movie! It was a midnight showing on Thursday for Heaven's sake and the theater was half full. What's wrong with these people? Hell, what's wrong with people?! If I wasn't entertained by the movie that I went just to get laughs because I knew it'd be terrible then I have no idea how anyone was entertained if they actually wanted to see the movie...because they thought they would genuinely like the movie. People were laughing at the stupid jokes in the movie which caused me to shake my head many times. But this is why excellent shows like Terriers gets canceled after one season while other shows like House get People's Choice Awards and Justified gets a second season. People are just dumb.

    Another thing: Some of Ron Pearlman's jokes were too close to breaking the "fourth wall". It's almost as if he knew the movie was so bad that his jokes in the movie...were about the movie.

    1/5 Stars


    Please enjoy something I wrote that was inspired by watching the movie...

    What Madness Is This?

    We set out on a mission, we three merry men: Kenneth of Amarillo, Mitchell of Gilmer, and Steven of Lynn. Our destination would be a place of grand entertainment. Our purpose would be that of fulfillment. Taking our three most trusted steeds we met at a pre-arranged point. There our appetites were satisfied and thirsts quenched, along with a pleasurable smoke.

    Our next task was to make the final trip to our destination. We had seen it yonder on our way but from afar. Its lights had shone brilliantly in the distance. But when we ventured again, our stomachs full and spirits high, no longer was our destination visible. It was as if some evil force had shadowed it from our sight. Where once we were certain of our errand, then our minds became clouded and wavering in resolution. We had seen it. It had been within reach. Why? we though. Why would the last leg of our journey become the most difficult? It was decided to seek out our now hidden journey's end despite our doubts.

    I, Kenneth of Amarillo, believed I had found this "theater" we were seeking. My companion, Mitchell of Gilmer, accompanied me in determining the identity of the structure. Every indication seemed to make this our wanted destination but as we trekked closer, seeing the high stone walls and lack of entrance, it became clear that we were deceived. It was not the place we sought for. It even lacked the event we wished to see. Discouragement began to overtake me, but just as my determination began to falter, Steven of Lynn arrived and determined what would be our true path.

    Once again we made out on our expedition. Steven's guidance led in a non-direct path, very treacherous, but it did lead us to our destination. As we left our steeds and observed our surroundings, one thing struck confusion and fear into our hearts. There was no light. The once brilliant luminance that had looked so welcoming was gone. It was then I spoke. "What madness is this?" My fellow men gave looks of uncertainty but despite this alarming circumstance we still marched on. It was late and our event was soon to begin without our attendance and so we hastily acquired our tickets. When the staff person asked which film I wished to see. There was only one answer I could give. "Season of the Witch," I huffed. When I mentioned the lights being out the staff seemed to be unaware of such an occurrence. I thought that odd. Perhaps some devilry had taken the theater? Could it be that someone...or something knew of my friends' and my weakness for the films of Nicolas Cage?

    Before, we had made jests of the number of patrons who would potentially be attending the film as well. We believed our appreciation for horrifyingly terrible but humorous Cage movies was a rarity. Oh how we were baffled by the sight as we turned to find our seats. It was a midnight screening. It was a Thursday. It was a movie starring Nicolas Cage and Ron Perlman titled Season of the Witch. The theater was not supposed to be half-full. As we found our seats my mind raced with questions. How could this many have the same appreciation as my comrades and I? I knew not the answer. And then it started.

    I had seen an untold number of Nicolas Cage's abysmal films and I had watched them multiple times. I believed I knew the lowest of lows. There would be no way to be shocked by this movie, Season of the Witch. I was shocked. Playing before my eyes was an abomination as if conjured by the Devil himself and sent up from Hell. It was as if the writing was done by a forlorn victim of the Black Plague. Every line uttered was like a pestilence unleashed upon the audience. And yet some guffawed at the film's attempt at humor. As if I was not already bewildered by the other audience members in their attendance, the unbecoming cacophony of laughter that filled my ears from these degenerates left me further baffled. I know in my heart that the demos, the common people, are an unintelligent group, but I had no notion that they would show themselves in public to such a movie and to actually be entertained by such filth. In a way the film audience was as embarrassing as the film.

    There were times when I would focus my attention to a man's bald head that sat in front of me. I imagined him being a man I truly admire, Andrew Zimmern, saying about the movie, "Now that's bizarre." How sad a day when a man must use his imagination to remove myself from a movie I desired to enjoy. How ironic, however, that the movie's tale of a witch's deceiving mirrored the movie's deceiving of me, of what I believed, or wanted, it to be. Like Nicolas Cage's character, I felt dragged along on a quest for absolution, of fulfillment, but like him I did not expect the journey to be such a burden, such a tax on my soul.

    But I knew the film's faults were not those of Nicolas Cage, or even Ron Perlman. If God Himself had spoken the lines written for the characters, and may He strike me down if I am in error, the film would retain its needed belonging on a cart to collect the Black Plague's dead to be burned. As Season of the Witch began its insipid climax, I then understood even more of the film's echo of real life. She wasn't a witch. She was the Devil himself. The movie wasn't going to be jovially appalling. It was showing its true form. It was unfurling reality upon me. Its identity would be more gruesome and more evil than I would have ever imagined. The movie was one starring Nicolas Cage...and it was one I could not enjoy. Even Perlman's character in his witticisms seemed to be reaching out to the audience as if he knew the truth of the film's repugnance. It was as if I was seeing Plato's Allegory of the Cave come to life.

    And then it ended. My torture had ceased as if I was saved from the Inquisition. Have I lost my faith, my faith in Nicolas Cage? I have not. However, Season of the Witch is, in my humble opinion, a new low, a low of Hell itself. Perhaps I can take something away from such a shame in cinema. Perhaps my actions should reflect what Perlman's character did against the evil, the Devil he fought. Head-butting the Devil is not the worst idea. Perhaps head-butting an inanimate object will beat my memories of Season of the Witch from my brain.
    Last edited by Lord Rahl; May 09, 2011 at 06:37 AM.

    Patron of: Ó Cathasaigh, Major. Stupidity, Kscott, Major König, Nationalist_Cause, Kleos, Rush Limbaugh, General_Curtis_LeMay, and NIKO_TWOW.RU | Patronized by: MadBurgerMaker
    Opifex, Civitate, ex-CdeC, Ex-Urbanis Legio, Ex-Quaestor, Ex-Helios Editor, Sig God, Skin Creator & Badge Forger
    I may be back... | @BeardedRiker

  6. #6
    Hobbes's Avatar Vicarius Provinciae
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Hobs Crk
    Posts
    10,683

    Default Re: Lord Rahl's Cinematic Review Repository

    Yes! Rahl, this is great, you always write excellent articles!

    BLM - ANTIFA - A.C.A.B. - ANARCHY - ANTI-NATIONALISM

  7. #7
    Lord Rahl's Avatar Behold the Beard
    Content Emeritus

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The stars at night are big and bright!
    Posts
    13,779

    Default Re: Lord Rahl's Cinematic Review Repository

    Thank you very much! I've got a bunch of reviews that I can post. I think I'll post a new one every time someone posts here. I wonder what I'll post next?

    Splice (2009)


    Ok, I never wanted to see this movie in the first place. Just watching 3 seconds of its trailers, I knew the movie would be terrible. So, what made me see it? Well, my friend text me that he saw it and explained a couple of 100% absurd and ridiculous events that happened in the movie. After I heard about them, I knew I had to see the movie...drunk, of course.

    So, what are these events that made me go see it? Without further delay, I'll explain. Like my reason to see the movie, there would be no reason for you to read this review without knowing what happened in the events. *ahem* The monster S Adrien Brody AND Sarah Polley, the two leading actors in the movie. Yeah, that's right. It s BOTH of them. But how can this be possible? The monster is a female, right? Well, wait for the amazing (that was a joke) plot twist to the movie! The monster changes sexes! OMG! What a great twist! But wait, that's not all! There's more?! No way!

    I'll provide an extremely brief synopsis of the movie before . Brody and Polley are two scientists who are a part of a hip, young, 30-something group of scientists who create a new species (that looks like a living ) that has some...chemical or something in it that has the potential to be used in a lot of things, so = $$$. Brody and Polley create a new species without the others knowing and it turns out have the same chemical, but much more, and also turns out to be pseudo-human. There's the short and incomplete synopsis. *yawn* But that's not what makes this movie memorable. Back to interspecies sex! YES!

    So, how/why does Brody have sexual intercourse with the new species? It's obvious that the movie makers wanted the monster to have that weird possible hotness. You know, like the Avatar effect. Have an alien, monster, whatever that is supposed to be different BUT give it a weird attractiveness that hits us subliminally. Think about Zoe Saldana's character in Avatar. She was a massive blue alien, but if a man could, he would tap that. I think this is how Adrien Brody first began to want to bang the monster, who they call "Dren". Actually, the movie shows that Sarah Polley used her own DNA in creating Dren. Brody figures that out, and he doesn't like it, but perhaps it turns him on too. Basically, the movie doesn't really explain why Brody develops an attraction to Dren, so much so as to her!

    There is one scene where Brody comes to see Dren, puts on some music, and then begins to dance with her. It's really weird and awkward already at that point and then Dren gives a, "I want to you," look to Brody. That even freaks Brody out and he goes away, later getting mad at Polley for using her DNA to make Dren. So, that was weird...and then Brody goes back to see Dren and...they start to make out...for apparently no reason. At first, Brody says it's not right, but then the man in him eventually gives in and he sticks his homo erectus (that's a terrible joke) into Dren and they have sex. It comes out of nowhere and it's completely awkward, obviously. When there is a human ing a weird-pseudo-attractive-new species, it's going to be awkward. I laughed my ass off while Brody was screwing Dren. I mean, when something that stupid and ridiculous is thrown in my face, I have to laugh. Dren sure was liking it. Then Polley walks in on the interspecies cowgirl position sex romp.

    So, that happened. Brody s Dren.

    Later, Dren changes sexes (naturally) to become a male and jumps on top of Polley, his hands holding her arms to her side. At that point, I had a feeling I knew what was going to happen next. Even though I was told what would happen, it was still too ridiculous to really believe it would. Polley screams and asks male-Dren, "What do you want?!" This is where Splice out does itself. It's ing genius. Male-Dren's reply is simple, and he growls his monster reply, "Inside...you..." As if I hadn't laughed hard before when Brody had sex with female-Dren, I laughed even harder when male-Dren gave his answer to Polley and then began to have sex with her too. Christ, I can't believe I'm writing this.

    And then Polley keeps the male-Dren/Polley baby. OMG! What a cliffhanger! It was really weird when Brody and Polley were having sex while Dren was supposedly sleeping...except for the fact that she woke up and watched them. Other things that confused me about the movie were the scientists themselves. They were all in their 30s and all "hip", like "cool" scientists. Now, does anyone really think that scientists who are smart enough to create a new species are going to be "hip" or "cool"? I don't think so. And I'm not one for fashion at all, but Polley wears a jacket that looks God-awful.

    Oh , I don't know what else to say. Splice is terrible. It's not good at all. It fails at achieving horror, drama, or...anything. It does achieve bringing awkwardness and ridiculousness, though. SPLICE! SPLICE!!! S.P.L.I.C.E.!!!

    S
    P
    L
    I
    C
    E
    !
    !
    !

    "Inside...you."

    2/5 Stars
    Last edited by Lord Rahl; January 27, 2012 at 03:16 AM.

    Patron of: Ó Cathasaigh, Major. Stupidity, Kscott, Major König, Nationalist_Cause, Kleos, Rush Limbaugh, General_Curtis_LeMay, and NIKO_TWOW.RU | Patronized by: MadBurgerMaker
    Opifex, Civitate, ex-CdeC, Ex-Urbanis Legio, Ex-Quaestor, Ex-Helios Editor, Sig God, Skin Creator & Badge Forger
    I may be back... | @BeardedRiker

  8. #8
    Hobbes's Avatar Vicarius Provinciae
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Hobs Crk
    Posts
    10,683

    Default Re: Lord Rahl's Cinematic Review Repository

    I kinda liked Thor, although it was certainly predictable as you say. What else do you have in store for us?

    Edit: Gah! We posted at the same tame . I hated Splice, too. And I had hopes for that movie, since I really liked the trailers.
    Last edited by Hobbes; May 09, 2011 at 06:20 AM.

    BLM - ANTIFA - A.C.A.B. - ANARCHY - ANTI-NATIONALISM

  9. #9
    Lord Rahl's Avatar Behold the Beard
    Content Emeritus

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The stars at night are big and bright!
    Posts
    13,779

    Default Re: Lord Rahl's Cinematic Review Repository

    Well, I just posted my ridiculous Splice review. I've got 18 pages worth of reviews on Facebook. Like I said in the OP, if anyone has a movie that they think I might have reviewed and want me to post it then feel free to ask. Some reviews are really damn long while others are pretty short.

    Now I'll post a review of a movie that seems to divide men!

    Casino Royale (2006)


    What does one need in an origin film? They need to see the character evolve into what the audience knows. With the infamous James Bond being the character to be developed, this movie had to do him justice. It did him none! Instead of Bond at the end of the film we are left with a gritty bar fighter type who SAYS that he is Bond. Mr. Craig, just because you say that you are Bond doesn't mean you are.

    "Bond's" relationship with the hotty Vesper is idiotic. I didn't feel any sexual tension between them very much through the film except for the parts which were obviously meant to show that. Later Vesper and Bond engage in corny romantic dialog that rivals the latter Star Wars films. Then, when "Bond" figures out that Vesper betrayed him he SEEMS to have gotten to his senses when he says he would kill her ("Allow me"). However, I guess he forgot all of that because a few minutes later he is trying to save her and looks as if he is about to cry. Oh, but it doesn't stop there. After "Bond" attempts to rescue her he then shows no remorse for her ("The is dead"). Now, I'm not sure how undeveloped his character was supposed to be portrayed but I was laughing at the stupidity of "Bond's" feelings for Vesper at the end. Also, no Bond movie should have him in a wheelchair and DEFINITELY not sucking on fingers. That was THE most idiotic and unnecessary scene in the movie, perhaps the franchise.

    There were good parts to the movie though. The action scenes. If the director (Martin Campbell who directed Goldeneye, a fantastic Bond movie) wanted to show romance he should have taken a page out of From Russia With Love's book. I don't care if the "Bond" in the film was more like the Bond in the books. This movie had to back up all of the Bond movies, not the book. Hopefully the next movie will be better. I want to see Bond, not Daniel Craig's "Bond".


    3.5/5 Stars
    Last edited by Lord Rahl; May 11, 2011 at 02:38 PM.

    Patron of: Ó Cathasaigh, Major. Stupidity, Kscott, Major König, Nationalist_Cause, Kleos, Rush Limbaugh, General_Curtis_LeMay, and NIKO_TWOW.RU | Patronized by: MadBurgerMaker
    Opifex, Civitate, ex-CdeC, Ex-Urbanis Legio, Ex-Quaestor, Ex-Helios Editor, Sig God, Skin Creator & Badge Forger
    I may be back... | @BeardedRiker

  10. #10
    Hobbes's Avatar Vicarius Provinciae
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Hobs Crk
    Posts
    10,683

    Default Re: Lord Rahl's Cinematic Review Repository

    Well, that's what most people complain about, that this was not Bond. Craig is not the best actor for this role. Have you reviewed Quantum of Solace, too?

    BLM - ANTIFA - A.C.A.B. - ANARCHY - ANTI-NATIONALISM

  11. #11
    God's Avatar Shnitzled In The Negev
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Wales
    Posts
    5,992

    Default Re: Lord Rahl's Cinematic Review Repository

    Yeah, I liked the idea of making Bond a bit darker and grittier, but not so much that he's a completely different character.

  12. #12
    Boustrophedon's Avatar Grote Smurf
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Posts
    3,158

    Default Re: Lord Rahl's Cinematic Review Repository

    I didn't particularly like your views on Osama bin laden but your reviews are hilarious and really well-written. I agreed completely with your Thor review! Heimdall (the black gatekeeper) fascinated me while the other character's didn't. Although the choice of a black guy as a Norse mythology gatekeeper was pretty weird the actor did a fine job imo. Keep writing reviews

    EDIT: I agree on Portman doing nudity

  13. #13
    Lord Rahl's Avatar Behold the Beard
    Content Emeritus

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The stars at night are big and bright!
    Posts
    13,779

    Default Re: Lord Rahl's Cinematic Review Repository

    Quote Originally Posted by Hobbes. View Post
    Well, that's what most people complain about, that this was not Bond. Craig is not the best actor for this role. Have you reviewed Quantum of Solace, too?

    I haven't seen Quantum of Solace because even those who liked Casino Royale said QoS sucked. If it's on TV then maybe I'll watch it.

    Quote Originally Posted by God View Post
    Yeah, I liked the idea of making Bond a bit darker and grittier, but not so much that he's a completely different character.

    Yeah, I didn't recognize him at all. The director of Casino Royale, which I hate, was the director of Goldeneye, which I love! How is that possible?

    Quote Originally Posted by Boustrophedon View Post
    I didn't particularly like your views on Osama bin laden but your reviews are hilarious and really well-written. I agreed completely with your Thor review! Heimdall (the black gatekeeper) fascinated me while the other character's didn't. Although the choice of a black guy as a Norse mythology gatekeeper was pretty weird the actor did a fine job imo. Keep writing reviews

    EDIT: I agree on Portman doing nudity

    At least we agree on something then! After Black Swan, which I haven't written a review yet because the movie was such a mind-, Portman has gone far enough to merit nudity. I mean, when you do a movie where you go down on yourself and :wub: a couple of times, how do you not get naked?!

    I'll post a couple more reviews here...

    Defiance (2008)


    It is interesting how a movie about the Holocaust, more specifically the killing of Polish Jews, was so bad. I mean, if you're going to do a movie on the Holocaust, you better make it good, or it won't be respectable. Defiance suffers from not knowing what it wants to be. It opens with brutal killing of Jews and has some scenes of excessive violence, but it adds in random scenes of terrible and corny romance and attempted comedy.

    Compare Daniel Craig's scene where he blows away a corrupted Polish man and two other men (sons? Nazis? I don't remember exactly) who killed Craig's family with Schreiber's scene where the woman new to their hidden community asks him if he ever gets lonely. WTF?! And then you've got the scene where Craig is on the white horse and he gives his Braveheart speech. *snore* The movie is rated R, and it does feel like it a few times in the movie, but it stoops to the level of a PG movie far too often for anyone to take it seriously.

    Defiance isn't terrible, but it fails to give the story any credit for feeling real. If you see Defiance, just remember the following three things: "No", forest wives, and vodka.


    3/5 Stars

    Avatar (2009)



    Oh man, why does this review have to be so long?! *sigh* I guess I know myself too well.

    So, Avatar is supposed to be a movie to change movies forever. James Cameron, with Avatar, has finally allowed himself to spew his nerdgasm upon the masses. This is his vision. Avatar is supposed to be an epic in scope, in story, in characters, and technology. Well, I think Cameron, who has been the man behind some of my most favorite movies such as Aliens and T2, not to mention other greats of his like The Terminator, True Lies, and The Abyss, got one of those right. That being the success of technology in Avatar.

    I'll admit that I was very skeptical of Avatar and what it stood for. Especially these days, we movie goers see a million eye-popping films with incredible (hopefully) CGI. Usually when a movie hinges on CGI it will suck. Transformers anyone? From the marketing of Avatar, I knew it was trying to draw in the crowds because of the CGI, and that's why I hesitated in claiming it another Cameron great. I have to hesitate no longer because Avatar is not a great movie. It's good, don't get me wrong, but it got no where near what my movie-loving heart wanted it to be. There is simply too much convention in Avatar for me to label it a "great". Yeah, the graphics are the best I've seen, but what else is there?

    The answer is: Not much. Where Avatar amazes in its spectacular CGI, and I do mean spectacular in the truest sense, it lacks on many fronts. Some people think critics are dumb in not thinking Avatar is a masterpiece because they say the story is predictable. Well, the critics are right. I'm OK with a predictable (to a point) plot, but I have to be very invested, not just financially, in the characters in order to not recognize it. If you want to know the story of Avatar then you can do so by watching the trailers. A guy gets put into an avatar of an alien on a world where the evil corporations want a valuable resource... yadda yadda yadda. It might not be James Cameron's fault that the trailers pretty much reveal the entire plot, something I often hate about trailers, but the damage is already done. I don't like going into movies knowing basically the entire plot because I've seen a trailer on TV. What's the point in going to the movie if you know what's going to happen? But it didn't stop with the trailers. In the movie itself there were multiple instances where I knew pretty much exactly what would happen later on. Now, me knowing the future plot doesn't mean that the movie is "bad", but it certainly doesn't help it be "good".

    As my brother has pointed out to me, the entire plot is faulty because...it represents a reversal in: human values, the development of mores et ethos (yeah, there's some Latin for ya), and basically any forward progress of the human race. It's a whole, "We're more technologically advanced than them, so we're better than them", mentality. As the movie played over its 2 hour and 40 minute length, I kept wondering why I was being told the story. Why? We get it James Cameron about the whole us whities killing and forcibly moving the Native Americans. The evil military and corporation dudes said the word "savages" a thousand times. Are humans in the (near) future so dog-headed and backwards that they see an alien race, and I'm guessing they're the first alien race to be discovered, as "savages"? Whatever that means anyway. In Avatar, humans seem to only care about getting what they want, even if they have to blow up to do so. I don't know...the plot was too easily analogous for me to believe it to be creative, interesting, or relevant. People like stories that they can relate to, but it has to be subtle. If the similarities, the analogy, between the movie and real life are too obvious then it won't work. This is what Avatar gets wrong. The story is only interesting because it's sci-fi with aliens, action, mechs, and an awesome looking Pandora. There is nothing added onto what every sci-fi movie puts out there story-wise to make it better than the rest.

    Not only is the story very predictable and hard to accept in its reverse morality(/development), but it also confused me in many parts where I found there to be plot holes or lack in character development. One example is when we are, and Sigourney Weaver is, told what is happening and why. The evil corporation man tells her that someone needs the mysterious "Unobtanium" because it's rare and valuable, and Weaver's job is to make sure no bad press gets out about the corporation and its military goons killing the Na'vi. The scene felt to me as if it was rushed and/or forced into the story so that everything would be legitimate (the mining of the mineral, etc). First of all, why the hell is unobtanium so valuable. There is no explanation for this. It's just some mineral we've never heard before and don't know it's uses, but damnit, it's got enough worth to make the possible destruction of an entire planet and alien race worth it! Second, we never see anyone involved with the press in the entire movie. Why is the guy so worried about press when we never see one person from the press? I'll cease in ripping the movie's plot a new one for the sake of all two people who will read this.

    What does Avatar do well? Obviously, the CGI is the highlight of the film and it did not disappoint. I actually was impressed by it and I didn't expect to be. I knew most everything I saw was CGI, but most of the time it looked too good for me to keep that in my mind. The alien bodies and faces were given enough emotion to have me accept their continued use. And the colonel in Avatar is pretty much a BAMF. He kind of made the movie for me.

    I really wish Avatar was rated R. An R rating almost guarantees that a movie won't fall into too much convention, and that is something Avatar does too much. Where Cameron's creativity in the entire Avatar world shines, the flawed plot shows, perhaps, a lack of effort or equality in creativity. Avatar feels like a James Cameron sci-fi action film that was spoon fed to me. I was in awe of the graphics, but not much else. There is enough glamour in the SFX to ultimately outweigh the blandness of everything else, but that's why this movie isn't great. Cameron has created a CGI spectacle that the oft cinematically spoon fed masses will eat up. Perhaps that is what he was going for to make the $$$, but I was expecting a lot more out of him after not seeing a film of his in many a year.


    3.75/5 Stars
    Last edited by Lord Rahl; May 11, 2011 at 02:38 PM.

    Patron of: Ó Cathasaigh, Major. Stupidity, Kscott, Major König, Nationalist_Cause, Kleos, Rush Limbaugh, General_Curtis_LeMay, and NIKO_TWOW.RU | Patronized by: MadBurgerMaker
    Opifex, Civitate, ex-CdeC, Ex-Urbanis Legio, Ex-Quaestor, Ex-Helios Editor, Sig God, Skin Creator & Badge Forger
    I may be back... | @BeardedRiker

  14. #14
    Boustrophedon's Avatar Grote Smurf
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Posts
    3,158

    Default Re: Lord Rahl's Cinematic Review Repository

    At least we agree on something then! After Black Swan, which I haven't written a review yet because the movie was such a mind-, Portman has gone far enough to merit nudity. I mean, when you do a movie where you go down on yourself and :wub: a couple of times, how do you not get naked?!
    I'll post a couple more reviews here...
    Yeah black swan was intense! I felt very very strange coming out of the cinema, something which doesn't happen alot. I have seen about half of the movies you reviewed so far and I must say that you're almost always spot on. Our political ideas were separated by a vast area but our cinematic ideas seem to overlap hehe I might try my hand at a review myself if I can find the time. Anyways keep doing your reviews +rep
    Last edited by Boustrophedon; May 09, 2011 at 04:28 PM.

  15. #15
    Lord Rahl's Avatar Behold the Beard
    Content Emeritus

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The stars at night are big and bright!
    Posts
    13,779

    Default Re: Lord Rahl's Cinematic Review Repository

    Quote Originally Posted by Boustrophedon View Post
    Yeah black swan was intense! I felt very very strange coming out of the cinema, something which doesn't happen alot. I have seen about half of the movies you reviewed so far and I must say that you're almost always spot on. Our political ideas were separated by a vast area but our cinematic ideas seem to overlap hehe I might try my hand at a review myself if I can find the time. Anyways keep doing your reviews +rep

    Yeah, Black Swan left me feeling...confused but in a good way.

    Watchmen (2009)


    Maybe I'm being overly harsh but Watchmen really wasn't very good. The only scenes that were REALLY good were those involving Rorschach. His scenes played out much more like the actual comic. When I heard they were making the comic - and yes, I know it's considered a "graphic novel" but whatever - I thought it wouldn't be too difficult of a movie to make. Visually it would be difficult but a comic is basically a storyboard. Snyder didn't have to do any work on that! Night Owl was well done too as well as the Comedian but the rest of the cast was sub-par. And what the hell is with all of the long sex scenes? The one scene inside of Archie was way too long and got close to being a porn scene. I like sex as much as the next guy, but when it seems too much effort is put into having OMG SECKS!1!!1! in a movie it bores me.

    Also, the slow motion fighting scenes were too long too. Thank Jesus they weren't nearly as numerous or as long as in Snyder's 300...but it was still too much. I didn't mind it when The Comedian was getting his ass kicked but all the other times I was simply waiting for them to be over. And what's with the weird music throughout? It threw me off every time I heard it show up, except for the music of Philip Glass who I'm obsessed with. I think Ozymandias was a pedophile. I'm serious. When they look through his computer I swear to God that I saw a folder titled "Boys". I'm not making that up. I almost screamed in the theater when I saw it. I imagined Ozymandias in the comic to be some complete manly badass. In the movie he was creepy-looking and didn't seem like a badass (until he started beating everyone up). Dr. Manhattan's voice wasn't god-like enough to satisfy. How am I supposed to believe that the most powerful being in the universe has a wimpy voice? I won't get into the plodding and forced dialog either.

    Basically this movie had too much that wasn't good and not enough that was. I'm disappointed because the comic was a very good read.


    3.5/5
    Last edited by Lord Rahl; May 11, 2011 at 02:38 PM.

    Patron of: Ó Cathasaigh, Major. Stupidity, Kscott, Major König, Nationalist_Cause, Kleos, Rush Limbaugh, General_Curtis_LeMay, and NIKO_TWOW.RU | Patronized by: MadBurgerMaker
    Opifex, Civitate, ex-CdeC, Ex-Urbanis Legio, Ex-Quaestor, Ex-Helios Editor, Sig God, Skin Creator & Badge Forger
    I may be back... | @BeardedRiker

  16. #16
    Atterdag's Avatar Tro og Hĺb
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    In the Valley of the Wind
    Posts
    6,691

    Default Re: Lord Rahl's Cinematic Review Repository

    I disagree with you pretty strongly on your Casino Royale review. Craig really reinvented the ageing Bond franchise in CR in a very nice way, although the follow-up Quantum was a massive let down IMO.

    And finally, please get naked Natalie Portman.
    Go rent the Darjeeling Limited :p
    Granted Lettre de Marque by King Henry V - Spurs given by imb39
    Сканија је Данска

    عیسی پسر مریم گفت :' جهان است پل ، عبور بیش از آن است ، اما هیچ ساخت خانه بر آن او امیدوار است که برای یک روز ، ممکن است برای ابدیت امیدواریم ، اما ماندگار جهان اما ساعت آن را صرف در دعا و نماز برای استراحت است نهان

    All of the Balkans is not worth the bones of a single Pomeranian grenadier.
    Otto von Bismarck


  17. #17
    Lord Rahl's Avatar Behold the Beard
    Content Emeritus

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The stars at night are big and bright!
    Posts
    13,779

    Default Re: Lord Rahl's Cinematic Review Repository

    Quote Originally Posted by Atterdag View Post
    I disagree with you pretty strongly on your Casino Royale review. Craig really reinvented the ageing Bond franchise in CR in a very nice way, although the follow-up Quantum was a massive let down IMO.

    I really don't think Bond had to be reinvented. The franchise was going downhill because the movies were bad, not because the idea of Bond was "old". Everyone still loves the "sexist, misogynist dinosaur," from the many Bond movies before. My favorites are Goldfinger, From Russia With Love, and Goldeneye. Honestly, I have no idea how Craig's Bond is actually Bond. He certainly seems arrogant but arrogant like an idiot.

    The poker game in the movie was terrible. How long did it go on? I don't know. The way they tried to help the audience understand how Texas Hold 'Em works was so completely obvious it made me roll my eyes. And Bond didn't even win it in an awesome way. Everyone in the last hand had a good hand. Bond just happened to have the most completely ridiculous hand to win. How is that cool? Bond should have won it by bluffing or something.

    I already brought up the Bond-Vesper relationship not making any sense. He...sucks on her fingers (WHY?!), something that even my sister says is really weird, says he loves her, when she betrays him he seems to not care if she's killed, and not a couple of minutes later he's trying to save her from drowning. Then later when M explains Vesper's motives and Bond says, "The is dead." So, he loves her, hates her, loves her, and then hates her all within the same movie. How does that make any sense?

    I'm not saying Casino Royale is a bad movie. I just don't think it's a good Bond film at all, even for an origin movie.
    Last edited by Lord Rahl; May 11, 2011 at 03:53 AM.

    Patron of: Ó Cathasaigh, Major. Stupidity, Kscott, Major König, Nationalist_Cause, Kleos, Rush Limbaugh, General_Curtis_LeMay, and NIKO_TWOW.RU | Patronized by: MadBurgerMaker
    Opifex, Civitate, ex-CdeC, Ex-Urbanis Legio, Ex-Quaestor, Ex-Helios Editor, Sig God, Skin Creator & Badge Forger
    I may be back... | @BeardedRiker

  18. #18
    Atterdag's Avatar Tro og Hĺb
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    In the Valley of the Wind
    Posts
    6,691

    Default Re: Lord Rahl's Cinematic Review Repository

    Well, I personally found the Bond franchise dull and uninspiring after Goldeneye and as such seeing a new atypical actor putting on the 007 identity without always lurking around in the incessant suit.

    I've never played poker and never found it the slightest interesting so I guess that's why I easily scroll over those parts

    So, he loves her, hates her, loves her, and then hates her all within the same movie. How does that make any sense?
    Sounds very much like a former relationship of mine.
    Granted Lettre de Marque by King Henry V - Spurs given by imb39
    Сканија је Данска

    عیسی پسر مریم گفت :' جهان است پل ، عبور بیش از آن است ، اما هیچ ساخت خانه بر آن او امیدوار است که برای یک روز ، ممکن است برای ابدیت امیدواریم ، اما ماندگار جهان اما ساعت آن را صرف در دعا و نماز برای استراحت است نهان

    All of the Balkans is not worth the bones of a single Pomeranian grenadier.
    Otto von Bismarck


  19. #19
    Hobbes's Avatar Vicarius Provinciae
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Hobs Crk
    Posts
    10,683

    Default Re: Lord Rahl's Cinematic Review Repository

    The best Bond was Sean Connery, hands down. And, we want more reviews!

    BLM - ANTIFA - A.C.A.B. - ANARCHY - ANTI-NATIONALISM

  20. #20
    Boustrophedon's Avatar Grote Smurf
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Posts
    3,158

    Default Re: Lord Rahl's Cinematic Review Repository

    Quote Originally Posted by Hobbes. View Post
    The best Bond was Sean Connery, hands down. And, we want more reviews!
    Seconded and seconded

Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •