Give YOUR Movie review

Now on to my movie review: on the plane on Saturday I saw a film called "Salmon Fishing in the Yemen".....

The researcher left his wife for the assistant, which made things dramatic but it was a pointless sort of sub-plot that made you like him less. (The movie did all the "right" things of making the wife seem like she was uncaring and discouraging toward him so he had a reason to leave, etc.)

Remember what I said about movie people on a "mission" to destroy Godly morality? You just gave me an example. From what you describe, NOTHING about the story really NEEDED an element of adultery; the writers just WANTED it to be there. I am sick to death of movies telling us that romance isn't really romance unless you abandon or betray or injure someone to gain your object of desire.
 
Remember what I said about movie people on a "mission" to destroy Godly morality? You just gave me an example. From what you describe, NOTHING about the story really NEEDED an element of adultery; the writers just WANTED it to be there. I am sick to death of movies telling us that romance isn't really romance unless you abandon or betray or injure someone to gain your object of desire.
I agree. If the researcher had been single it would have been just fine. The hinge point in the romance was that the young woman had been dating (for a short time) a special forces guy who went missing/presumed dead in Afghanistan, so she couldn't know whether he were dead or alive, and she was sort of up in the air. She and the researcher didn't have a fling, but they were falling for each other -- and then it turned out her boyfriend was still alive after all. So, there was tension, but no sex, and that would have been enough to give the story its suspense -- which guy would she choose? They didn't need to have the stodgy wife who sits on the husband's dreams, just there so he could leave her and feel free. So stupid!
 
Something similar happened in Downton Abbey which made me very angry. (Spoilers ahead!) One of the most honorable, respectable, upstanding characters in the series - Lord Grantham - cheated on his wife with one of the servants. I guess the point that the writers were trying to make was that in times of crisis, even the seemingly perfect people make stupid mistakes. But I just felt like they could have shown that in a less drastic way. That storyline just stuck out like a sore thumb... the rest of the series made much more sense, even if it didn't fulfill my desires as a viewer.
 
One good point about the 2004 "King Arthur" movie is that in it, with Arthur and Lancelot both meeting Guinevere BEFORE she marries Arthur, Lancelot consciously keeps hands off Guinevere, because he respects Arthur having "seen her first." So, no "noble adultery" nonsense, yay!

Oh, and Lila, adultery is not merely a "mistake," because people do it ON PURPOSE.
 
Something similar happened in Downton Abbey which made me very angry. (Spoilers ahead!) One of the most honorable, respectable, upstanding characters in the series - Lord Grantham - cheated on his wife with one of the servants. I guess the point that the writers were trying to make was that in times of crisis, even the seemingly perfect people make stupid mistakes. But I just felt like they could have shown that in a less drastic way. That storyline just stuck out like a sore thumb... the rest of the series made much more sense, even if it didn't fulfill my desires as a viewer.
I felt the same way -- Lord Grantham was like the only truly noble and honorable character (not that they were all horrible, but he was particularly good), and then even he was tarnished. I don't recall that he had an affair, though; he pulled himself back from the brink, didn't he?

I had meant to post the other day about watching the movie version of the Broadway musical "1776," which spotlights the writing of the Declaration of Independence. You would think that would be pretty dull, but the musical makes it fun. The characters are very well-done. It is an old film, probably 30 years old, but because it is about the year 1776, that doesn't matter too much.

The music is grand; the actors do a fine job, there is some language but nothing like the F-word, just the kind of cussing you might expect back in 1776. If you like musicals, and history, you will like this film. It shows how the Continental Congress was trying either to make peace with England or full-out rebel, and how John Adams and Ben Franklin and others had to struggle to get the other congressmen on board ... it was very informative about the birth of our nation.

And it had catchy tunes and dancing, and lots of wry humor. I would give it 8/10.
 
I saw "1776" live on stage!

Carol and I were just at a church that showed the Christian-leaning movie "Seven Days In Utopia." It brought to golf some of the intensity that was found in "Chariots Of Fire." Almost all of "Seven Days" was superb; just a very few parts were a little forced, like an unnecessary scene of momentary conflict between the young man and his mentor. Still, even though my desire to play golf is only slightly greater than my desire to be burned at the stake, I enjoyed this movie.
 
That is so cool you saw a live production of 1776! I envy you! I never heard of the golf movie you describe, but it sounds good.

I downloaded the movie "The Godfather" onto my Kindle to watch on the plane this weekend as we had a 4-hour flight. The book is one of my favorites, which I know is weird because I am such a pollyanna lovey/dovey kind of person, but I admire the skill of Puzo as a writer, the way he weaves the stories of so many interesting characters together, and the whole ethos of the book. It is violent, yes, but the Godfather creates an alternate reality for himself and his family in America, and somehow makes it work; it's a very beguiling kind of story. Outside the law, but with its own laws.

Anyway -- it has some adult themes; one of the Corleone family has an extramarital affair, and there is some cussing. Again, no f-word, but a few unsavory exclamations. And there's plenty of violence, although only a few really bloody/gory shots. The movie follows the book very well, but it is almost 3 hours long, and it does not cover all the story lines in the book! The book was just so intricately drawn, it would have take them 6 hours to do justice to all the sub plots.

I enjoyed the movie though; Marlon Brando as the Godfather was very convincing, and Al Pacino as his son Michael is very good; you can see him being transformed into the Godfather himself. Also Robert Duvall as the consigliere Tom Hagen does a fine job. And James Caan as Sonny, he was really good. All the principals were very well done.

It's not a children's movie, and there's even one brief scene of a topless woman, which surprised me because they didn't really need to show it; it was the wedding night of Michael, and you got the idea of what was going to happen anyway! Except for that and the violence, I thought it did a nice job of presenting the book as best they could in the time they had to work with. I would give it 8/10.
 
I finally got around to seeing "Watchmen." For those of you who haven't seen it, and who are under the delusion that there might be some kind of merit in it, I will save you from wasting your time. The movie was made for the purpose of transmitting the following messages:

1) The United States is evil.

2) Republican presidents want to destroy the world just for the fun of it.

3) Some guys can't achieve any romantic passion unless they do some superhero deeds first.

4) There cannot possibly be a God, because anyone who really has vast supernatural powers over time and space MUST inevitably have LESS love, LESS compassion, and LESS common sense than the average mortal chosen off the street at random.

Of course, if you WANT to spend hours having a movie tell you these things, "Watchmen" is your movie.
 
why do you feel that all directors are working for some evil force (duffers) in trying to convert you to some mindset or belief in all of their media?
Sometimes they are. Stories and art have a great power to communicate values, and so of course they're often used to do just that. That's why there's "propaganda" films. They work.
 
L'assault

Synopsis: Based on a true story, a SWAT team is tasked with storming a high-jacked Air France plane to save its passengers(imdb.com)

Rating: 8/10

Review: If you love thrillers watch this.
I was in Paris few months after the event.


Kirikou et les bêtes sauvages

Kirikou's Grandfather says that the story of Kirikou and The Witch was too short, so he proceeds to explain more about Kirikou's accomplishments. We find out how little boy became a gardener, a detective, a maker of pottery, a merchant, a traveler and a doctor.

Rating: 10/10

Review: Just as good as the first movie.
Must watch for animation fans.
 
Last edited:
Seems like I saw a couple of movies lately.

one was "How Green was My Valley," the best picture of 1941 I think. It is black and white and was directed by John Ford, a famous director of westerns, but it is not a western.

It is set in Wales in the late 1800's or turn of the century, in a little coal-mining town. It follows the family of the little boy who is narrating the story. It's a family of, I think, 5 brothers and one sister, and it shows how they cope with their town's mine laying off miners and their changing way of life. Some of the brothers leave to go to America when there's no work for them; one marries and has a child ... the little boy gets the chance his older brothers never had to go to school, and he's set to move on to a bigger city and pursue higher education -- but he wants to work in the mines like his father and brothers.

It's a really nice tale of family, how children grow up and move on, how tragedy strikes, and how wonderful things happen, too. It's very tragic, and yet very moving. Quite nicely done.
 
Last week I rented "Man on a Ledge" so ...

Title: Man on a Ledge
Year: 2012
Plot: An ex-cop turned con threatens to jump from a hotel ledge in Manhattan. When police arrive on the scene, he requests to speak to a specific detective. However, things are not nearly as clear-cut and straightforward as they seem.

Rate: 9
My review: If I really wanted to, I could probably spend some time and find a plot hole or two in this movie, but in all honesty, I really enjoyed it. It was fast-paced and upbeat, and there was a few twists. At first, it seemed like you were watching some drama about a man about to kill himself and then it changed into something else and then again into something else. It was a fun and thrilling watch. I really enjoyed it. :)
 
Wow thanks for that review! Now I want to see the movie.

I also watched "Reversal of Fortune," which must have been made in the early 1980's. It is the story of the appeal to the guilty verdict given to Klaus von Bulow for attempting to kill his wife by giving her an injection of insulin -- which left her in a coma. After he was found guilty, he enlisted very smart lawyer Alan Dershowitz to get an appeal and re-trial. So it is a true story. The best part of this is the two lead actors, Ron Silver as Dershowitz and particularly Jeremy Irons as Klaus. He's just so creepy and yet you have to watch him, like a snake ... I enjoyed the film, but I had taped it from network TV so obviously they had edited the language. I am thinking that if you get it on DVD, it may have some very strong language, like the F word. So beware. The subject matter is creepy, but the acting and writing is very good.
 
Review for a game called Dust: An Elysian Tail. Copy/Pasted
I'm a weird guy who likes really hard platformer games. Games like Maximo, Crash Bandicoot 2 on 100 percent completion, Another World, Megaman, Tomb Raider, Castlevania, the list goes on. Dust: An Elysian Tail is a clash of all these great games that just happens to have furry characters.

Except, like the others, this game is not what you’d expect. For starters, this game is designed to be played on harder difficulty settings, if that gives you any idea of its appeal. This brings on more focus to light RPG elements, being inventory management and attribute advancement, while the rest relying solely on your skill. Combined with some platformy metroidvania exploration, sidequests, puzzles and learnable techniques, it incorporates more depth to the experience than the simple act of slaughtering enemies.

The combat itself is very much simple to grasp, yet complex. You only have one moveset and in reality you only use a few buttons, but every move can be varied and followed up by something else that has purpose in some way or another in battle. The balance in game is well tuned to fight simple button mashing for high combos, implementing character fatigue for powerful move and magic usage, while changing the enemy types to encourage different approaches to combat. The difference here is that enemies do high amounts of damage on harder difficulty levels which really brings out the best in this game and forces you to fight logically, yet with style.

Dust also has his companion Fidget who can cast spells that you combine with your attacks, allowing you to deal ridiculous combos and juggle your opponents. Dust can parry, although this move is usually only useful for bigger enemies since you can’t juggle them, and it’s the only way to kill them. Dust’s other notable ability includes grappling and throwing, on ground and mid air. This is not only a great way to attack other enemies and finish one off, but any air throw to the ground is followed by a bounce after performing, allowing you to attack right after. These small things are what keep the entire moveset viable, no matter what move you use. Let’s not also forget that Dust can dodge-dash left or right to avoid attacks and other environmental dangers.

The main truth though is that MOST of your time will be spent fighting and platforming, and you do pull off a lot of it. If you aren’t running around then you are in cutscene. Depending on how much you like this game, this can either get incredibly repetitious or extremely laborious when the save points and stores are sometimes spread just too far apart. This also comes back to revisiting areas or wanting to leave one – you can use save spots to leave, but you are limited to “Teleport stones.” When you want to return, you can only access the beginning or ending of the map and will have to fight your way all the way back to where you can now access or need to continue.

There are also some other technical errors and inconsistencies with the game design. Some moments you can choose what to say or do related to the plot, many other times you can not. Some side quests reward no experience on completion. The Skill Distribution system caps how far you can level certain skills based how caught up the other ones are. There is a reason other RPG games do not do this, and can be severely limiting on how you want to manage your character. This may prove as a spoiler, but only near the end are there great animated cutscenes. I can understand that the development schedule and budget of the maker could of course not allow him to make more, especially during his crunch time (He had three months or so to speed up progress to meet launch date), but as a finished title they seem incongruent with the rest of the game. They’re totally awesome, don’t get me wrong, but I bet for a lot of people the game could use more of these to hold interest.

The story, voice acting and presentation seem innocent and simplistic enough at first, but only as a perquisite of pacing. Being a fantasy game, Dust doesn’t rely on drugs, blood and guns to tell a mature, dark story that you can get emotionally invested into, but keeps the situations realistic based on the circumstances. War seems pretty cliché these days in video games, but Dust treats it as a serious issue, showing the terrible widespread effects on people who aren’t even actually involved. As things get worse for the main heroes, the voice acting gets to shine, showing real concern, anger, sadness and so on appropriate to the situation, and the writing really reflects this, especially for the character Fidget. When a character dies, you feel the impact.

If all of this sounds too serious to you, then don’t fret. Dust is as much of a game about humor as it is story, tossing in tons of references to other games and fourth wall breaking jokes that are quite clever and well placed, but not oversaturated. Character interaction between Dust and Fidget work better than it should for other games of this nature, one particular scene highlighting this during a sequence where you have to make a doll lookalike of Fidget. This is personality that games just don’t have anymore, and for it to even work given the character’s depth and likable assets is a testament that outreaches its quality as a game product.

So really when all is said and done, Dust: An Elysian Tail is a great Xbox Live game with some small imperfections. It’s also great looking, but from what I can tell it’s not for everyone. For those who can get over the look though, I highly recommend this game.
 
Title: Never Let Me Go
Year: 2010
Plot: Tommy (Andrew Garfield), Ruth (Keira Knightley), and Kathy (Carey Mulligan) spend their childhood at an English boarding school, but as they grow older, they must deal with their feelings for each other and prepare themselves for the fate that awaits them.

Rate: 6
My review: If I am being completely honest, I watched this movie because of Garfield and Knightley. The idea of the move was good; it's based off a book, I think. I loved the story line, but it still felt like it was missing something. No complaints with the acting; that was spot on. It also had quite a bit of nudity, which I didn't like. I guess for me it was an average movie, but when I finished, I just felt kind of depressed. It wasn't made out to be a happy movie or anything; I think it was supposed to be sad, but still ...

I'm going to do another real quick.

Title: New York, I Love You
Year: 2009
Plot: I'm not actually sure. It's a bunch of love stories.

Rate: 4
My review: I did not like this movie. It felt like there was no beginning and no end. It was like you got the middle portion of a bunch of love stories that were all shoved together. There was no time for character developement. It was just frustrating. I really wanted to turn it off after about 40 minutes, but I kept thinking that it might get better. It never did. The acting was decent, but that was about it.
 
Title: An American Haunting
Year: 2006
Plot: Based on a local Tennessee folklore legend. With over 20 books written on the subject, and a town that still lives in fear of the return of the unseen spirit, the story of "An American Haunting" is terrifying. Between the years 1818-1820, the Bell Family of Red River, Tennessee was visited by an unknown presence that haunted the family and eventually ended up causing the death of one its members

Rate: 8
My review: Loud and too short but looks amazing.
 
I finally saw the "Iron Man" movie #1. I had never seen any Marvel movies until I saw The Avengers, and that made me want to see the others. So I saw Iron Man was going to be on TV, and I taped it. I liked it very much.

Robert Downey Jr is very good as smarmy billionaire Tony Stark who becomes Iron Man. I liked the way they showed the history of how he gets that electro-magnet heart in the first place, and how he creates the Iron Man suit and why.

The only thing is, Tivo cut off the very end of the movie, just when Nick Fury appeared in Tony's living room, so I don't know what was said between them. Now I am curious to see Iron Man 2.

If you like super-hero movies, I would give this a 7 or 8 out of 10. It was watchable and fun, and it showed the birth of Iron Man.
 
Title: Atrocious
Year: 2010
Plot: The found footage documents a family of five spending their holidays at their summerhouse where brother and sister Cristian and July Quintanilla pass the time investigating a terrifying local urban legend.

Rate: 8
My review: Slow to start but exciting at last with a man caught in a house with a schizophren at night.
 
Title: Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban.
Year: 2004
Plot: Harry Potter is yet stuck at his aunt and uncle's for the summer break. To his surprise Harry finds out that Aunt Marge is coming to stay at the Dursley's. This doesn't comfort Harry at all, because he has had unpleasant experiences with Aunt Marge in the past. One night Harry gets angry and makes Aunt Marge swell up magically. After setting Marge afloat, Harry grabs his possessions and starts to leave out into the night.

He see's a dog in the bushes across the street and accidently summons the Knight Bus which takes him to The Leaky Cauldron. Harry expects to get in trouble, and when he enters the Leaky Cauldron the Minister of Magic greets him there. Cornelius Fudge is glad to see Harry alive, and excuses him of using magic while under age.

The next day Harry awakes from thinking what an odd night it was. He hears Hermione and Ron talking, and begins to leave his room. Ron and Hermione appear to be bickering, and as Harry steps onto the landing Ron says Harry's name, and Hermione says it too as she turns around. Harry is glad to see Hermione and all of the Weasleys there. Mr. Weasley pulls Harry aside, and tells him about Sirius Black being after him.

Harry head's back to Hogwarts and is constantly hearing news about Sirius Black being on the loose, and after him. Because of Sirius being on the loose Dementors are placed all around the school. Hermione ends up taking several classes at once with the use of a time-turner. Harry finds out who Sirius Black really is, and goes to save him a first time in the Shrieking Shack.The time-turner comes into play later as Harry and Hermione have a bit of Deja Vu as they go back in time to change things that happened before. For example rescuing Sirius from his imprisonment, and help him escape on Buckbeak whom they also save from being executed.

Rate: 9
My review:I highly enjoyed the film and the feel to it the first time I saw it 2004. and still do. It was different seeing the trio in Muggle clothing for a lot of the film. I enjoyed who they cast as Sirius, Lupin and Pettigrew. It was really sad that Richard Harris died, because I didn't like the new look or voice of Michael Gambon as Dumbledore. Although he did a better job as Dumbledore in this film than he did in GOF and OOTP. My favorite scene is the part where we learn about Hermione having a time-turner. I love Hermione, because she is such a faithful friend, intelligent witch, and knows how to help out in certain situations that Harry would be lost without her. That is also my favortie chapter in the book. I really enjoyed how well they created the scene where Sirius was escaping, and his compliment of Hermione being the brightest witch.

I give it a 9, because I would've love to have seen more parts from the book done on the screen, but am glad that they didn't put those movie, because I can cherish them in my imagination forever.
 
Back
Top