Change Your Image
nikolobg
Reviews
Pantheon (2022)
I did not like it, but it is an 8 stars
A well done cartoon.
Now if we compare it to Japanese anime, it is like a first year student of the art did this, and they still have 3 more years to go before starting as an intern in a Japan animation studio.
In other words, to those used to what is produced across the ocean - this falls to just watchable.
The Music is good, has perfect impact.
Now the story. It is a drama. I could not get pass the 3rd episode without forwarding, and I was bored at the end. So why did I give it an 8 ?
Well i think the show is that good for those that seem to like it. For people that are not bothered by North American animation AND are into a drama. And want to explore new technology concepts.
In fact I suspect most people are not into the show and drop it after the first episodes and never comment on it again.. That is why this show was cancelled. The viewership numbers were just not there. If this was a hit they would have never treated it the way they did, by shelving it and then saying you know what have it, who cares - for season 2.
So I gave it an 8th because for people that this connects with - and I read reviews that say this is a masterpiece - so out of respect for them this gets 8th stars from me. Because for those people it is brilliant. And they are not wrong even if I disagree.
But apart that it is a drama with sub par animation, was there something else I did not like?
I have huge issues with the story, will not explore it here as I don't want this review to contain spillers.
I have issue with the attention to detail, for example a guy is tied and a lobotomy will be done to him. He is tied to a contraption, but his head is free to move, making it pointless to tie him in the first place. This kind of stuff is acceptable in an NA cartoons, as producers are just too lazy to design things, but to me it is not.
But my biggest problem is that the story unfolds in a tell mode. Characters keep explaining what happened or is happening. I don't know if this is because of the limited animation talent, so it is better to have people talking, or just the writing that did this.
In any event, the producers obviously watched Serial Experiments Lain - another snooze fest for me. And have brought a show forward that has resonated with a certain amount of people.
Just not me.
Peter Pan & Wendy (2023)
What a flop. Yet it should not be so!
The movie has it all. It has a budget. A music score. Action. Adventure. And a ton of character to get attached to. CGI and they even built a real pirate ship (in a studio).
On paper this should work. Has to work. So why does the movie fall flat on its face?
It has no heart. No magic. The problem is how the small changes to the story gutted it. Not compared to the old story, but as a stand alone story.
You don't believe me, read on -
Wendy is now the main character and as the movie opens, the camera follows her. Let us see where this new story takes us.
Immediately, seconds into the movie, she gives her mother attitude "I heard you the first time mother!" Wendy says.
Why? What is the purpose?
In the original movie, the Mother and daughter are allies. They are levelheaded and have a strong bond. Here Wendy is a spoiled brat. And there is no reason for it. At one point she says to her mother "And what if I don't want your life!" Wow. Why do we need this? Whom wrote this? We have departed from the original story, drove off a cliff, and went into teen drama and at this point I don't think it is better.
Then as her brothers play fight, Wendy proceeds to grab a sword and join in the fight with her brothers. She jumps on top of them and fights to win. Why? In the original the older brother is very careful when fighting his young sibling and pretends he is stabbed and defeated. And falls to the ground vanquished to the delighted squeals of his little brother. It is cute.
There is no real competition between them. This implies what a close family they are, they care for each other. Wendy in the original is the bigger sister, the storyteller. She is older and mature but also a kid and you can see she loves her little brothers almost like a mother.
I guess this was too much for the new Disney vision. A girl acting like a mother, taking care of....children.
So our new Wendy fights now. It looked like some one may loose an eye during the duel.
When Wendy wins, because she is tough and strong as a boy you see, now a mirror is broken. She proceeds to call her brother a tattletale for looking at her and thus her father understanding who is responsible for the broken mirror.
So we have now a sibling infighting. Why? At this point I don't like the new Wendy. As a matter of fact I dislike her and so I suspect most of the audience. This is not a question which one is better. It is just the new one is behaving like a spoiled boy and all the magic of the old story is lost.
Ok lets continue: She tells her father it is all her brother's fault, and when the father leaves and her brother asks why did you say it is our fault, Wendy responds "you are a pirate are you not? It is every man for him self."
This is beyond stupid. New Wendy is selfish. BVut why make her so? The only thing I can think off is this agenda that girls need to be be as strong and independent as boys, overwrites any actual story telling.
Contrast to the magic of the original where every scene sets her as mature and some one that would protect her brothers, she would do anything for them. She loves them and in the original when Peter wants to take Wendy with him, she even tells him that her brothers are coming along and there is no point arguing it. In this new one "every man is for him self" Yey! Is a total contrast.
This goes on and on.
I have to say the casting is mostly a miss. Peter is not an actor and a child, he is a child actor and he acts like one.
Wendy looks too big, I guess they wanted Milla Jovovich daughter regardless if she fit. She also overacts, for example when she sees tinkerbell for the first time and says "I don't thing that is a bug" her face instead of wonder is showing fright, which confused me until I realized she is overplaying all emotions.
The best star is obviously Jude Law who is on another level (along with Molly Parker whom is flawless for her screen-time). Tinker-bell is also well cast as her face and play are exactly the type of natural joy the movie needs to portray. - for those three the movie gets 3 stars from me.
The little brothers and the 'lost boys' are mos-tly again children acting as best as they can.
The movie score is over the top, constantly trying to tug at our emotions, when we are not there yet. Thus it does not compliment the movie but is taking over and borders on annoying.
But as we saw, the biggest issue is that the movie has no consistent inner map. At one point Wendy even slaps Peter Pan. At that point I wondered how it would look if Peter slapped her right back.
3 stars for this flop.
Life (2015)
Its an OK drama.
A movie about James Dean stands or falls by the portrayal of the man. Everything else is secondary to capturing that unique mesmerizing person.
I am a straight male, yet I remember the first time I googled that name and started browsing his photos. There was something there completely out of the ordinary. Strength with fragility, sadness with mischievousness, rebellion resting in the moment. Its like watching young Marlon Brando or Ryan Gosling in a movie like Drive, there is something extraordinary there your brain cant define but can understand.
Dane DeHaan, who I don't know outside of this movie, could probably portray Justin Bieber just fine, but playing James Dean requires a different beast of an actor all together.
Gravity (2013)
Lower your expectations
I was reading the bad reviews. There are allot of people whom hold the belief they are really clever. You will hear comments like:
"Sandra Bullock has become an astronaut but lacks even the basic skills for that occupation." She is a scientist sent in space for a single scientific mission. We do this currently.
"These objects just don't orbit anywhere--ANYWHERE!!!!--near close enough to each other to make these events even remotely possible." You are right as we currently don't have the next generation shuttle and the Chinese don't have a space station yet, so yeah they don't orbit close enough since they are not yet real. You gifted child you.
"No way could Ryan Stone figure out how to operate a Soyuz capsule in a few seconds of reading the manuals." The soyuz capsule is currently an emergency reentry vehicle on board the International Space Station, astronauts are trained on it, even scientists who are not expected to use it. It is pointed out in the movie. The pilot would be the mission commander..... forget it, yeah she learned to fly from the manual, you are a clever little .
"What happened to Clooney character? Is he waiting to appear in the sequel if the film succeeds?" What?!? are you serious? The whole emotional power of what happened to him comes from the fact that you know without seeing it!
"The Chinese craft was already heading toward earth...how?" Its not a craft but a space station in a stable orbit around earth balanced between its inertia around the earth and the pull of our planets gravity.The station was loosing its orbit after the collision.... ohhh just forget it, it was magic.
Lower your expectations, stop watching movie trailers and enjoy a solid movie.
Lockout (2012)
Oh, what surprises we find in such unexpected places.
I believe that the enjoyment of a movie is directly proportional among other to your beforehand expectations about it. So with that in mind, let me tell you about this movie; It has a completely unoriginal story, terrible special effects and acting that will never be considered, even in a slow movie year, Oscar wordy. In short it's an action / science fiction that should leave you empty.
Yet, it is not boring, quite the contrary. It has a very special 'Je ne sais quoi' to it. I so wanted to use that in a review for which I want to apologies to you.
I enjoyed it more than most films I have seen this year. Perplexed to explain what makes it unique without spoiling it for you and considering my first sentence, I will say after much reflection, seeing it with very low expectations would be the best. It will allow you from the start to get into the world the directors are painting for you, couple that with a possession of a twisted sense of humor and you will find a gem of a movie in there.
In short, for what it is, it is a gem.
Snow White and the Huntsman (2012)
So Beautiful and Empty
In the first opening scenes I was mesmerized by the visuals and the enchanting raw power of the young Snow White, Raffey Cassidy. I could see my imagination taking flight in those ayes of hers, a story to come as pure as her child innocence. I wanted to discover through her the magical world about to unfold. How I wish now she never had to grow up and give the main role to Kristen Stewart. At that moment, the movie died. It would take me 30 minutes to realize what had happened and then I spent an hour and a half uninterested, squirming in my seat for the ending, bored among spectacular visuals.
The beautiful decors could not carry the main protagonist. Charlize Theron, so perfect and powerful in her role could not replace the main character. The story itself so old and true could not come to life when the principal was a walking dead. Kristen Stewart, her usual inert self would be perfect to play the role of a corpse. Seeming to realize this, the director gave her very few lines, the ones she had were painfully delivered. Her speech to rouse the troops before the battle, just left me deeply uneasy.
In the end, I did not care for the actors on the stage nor the story. That must be a deadly sin for any movie.
Blitz (2011)
Surprisingly Dull
The movie is a solid 5 yet I find myself wondering if there is something else apart from the obvious that makes it an average title only worthy if you have 2 hours needed wasting. Apart from the obvious reasons, after watching it I could feel there was an inner weakness which was not immediately apparent to me.
The obvious reasons are a story with plot holes and unbelievable situations, two dimensional characters and story lines that go nowhere. The action is real and leaves place for acting and a deep story, two elements which are not there as I said. The story is terribly weak and you feel the actors doing stuff because it's in the script. Allot of the secondary characters are in the movie for no reason, with a story line about them that we don't care about, goes nowhere and remains unresolved in the end. The only story that matters is the hunt by Nash and Brant but the way they are thrown together to visit the serial killer is just retarded, or rather it's just because the script says so. Nash who is responsible for a task-force hunting the serial killer wonders if he can tag along to visit a lead as he has nothing else to do and Brant because he is a nice people person likes the idea to have a partner on this visit (there is allot of sarcasm in what you just read). Those kind of forced events due to the "script says so", and there are many which are well covered by other reviews, just makes the movie unbelievable.
After reflecting further I realized the biggest fail of this movie is that it's a criminal thriller, yet there is no suspense, criminal investigation or thrills. The audience knows who the murderer is from the start, so there is no mystery or excitement in discovering who did it. We know our hero Steven Seagal can't be hurt or killed so we are not concerned about what can happen to him when he meets the serial killer
uhhh I mean Jason, Jason Statham, honest mistake I swear. The investigation by the detectives is as exciting and original as the republican debates. So in the end I am left with little realistic action, a story I don't care about which as the movie progresses I find boring, script holes, unbelievable events and characters that act based on a weak script.
There must have been some cool moments otherwise I wouldn't give it a 5, I just can't remember them right now.
Leningrad (2009)
A top looking movie that disappoints completely.
If you want to watch it because of the epic war theater - the siege of Leningrad - don't. As a war movie this one is a complete JOKE - from the bad special effects to a director with zero grasp of reality: in one scene 20 Germans are running towards 20 dug in Russians. The Russians counter attack by getting out and running towards the Germans. They shoot once and then they charge, the Germans do the same like a civil war battle and then we have a hand to hand fight of those 40 people?!?!? And that represents the battle at the Leningrad front. You want see more, that's it, that's all, move along to the acting.
Acting - 2nd rate. You will see the 2 stars, Gabriel Byrne and Mira Sorvino tired and going trough the mechanics of acting. Good performance from the kids and Olga Sutulova.
Ohh, but Wait you say! This is a great drama, an epic in human suffering and endurance, thats why i will watch it! Yeah, but this movie does no justice to the Siege of Leningrad where 1.5 million people lost their lives. It barely scratches the surface of the 872 days of bravery, self sacrifice and complete horror that was the siege.
The real problem with the movie is that after watching it i feel angry at an epic story being told to me by amateurs, for that is how it feels at the end. (except the kids and the militia girl)
Triage (2009)
It tries but at the end it is an amateur effort.
I blame the director and the script writer. This movie has good parts, but at the end if i had to pin the bad it is the way the story was put together. You see an 'amateur' directing with a vision which i could not agree with. I had trouble expressing whats wrong with this movie but there it is - an amateur story telling.
Without giving spoilers, i found my self disagreeing with the tempo of the action, the forced confrontations and negotiations, the arguments for why the characters are acting this way. It seemed that they were doing it because the director demanded it for the next scene to make sense. Even in small things like the doctor saying to Farrell 'we found you by the river'... seemed to say to me, so that's why you are here as you see we have a river in this country and you were by it and we found you, and so there you go, that's why you are back here with me lets move on .... made me angry.
So i disliked the movie as it was forced. Farrell is nice but working with this script/director is a pain to watch.
Spartacus (2010)
So bloody good !!
This is not a series for everyone and many people will find a lot in it offensive. They will have good cause. If you are under 16 you should not watch it. Why am i so excited by it then: For the ones that want to see fights, blood, brutality, sex, men looking like gods, blood, erotica, excitement, blood, swearing, allot of skulls being bashed, sweat, savagery, arena fights, honor, friendships intrigues, assassinations, and lets not forget some more blood, this is a show for you.
It is brutal and it is one of the best shows out there. It is not a soup opera and if you are one of those people that got excited by a show like CAPRICA skip this one.
This show makes your hart race. The first episode is the weakest, but by episode 4 which i just saw i am swearing by all the Roman Gods that this is what i was born to watch. It is raw bloody entertainment!
This show is so unique, it is in a category with THE WIRE, thought they have noting in common and their uniqueness lies in completely different places, they are bot light years away of what is being made.
For a low budget with computer graphics, after the first weaker episode, the show becomes so realistic, by episode 4 it has griped me in its razor sharp clutches and the downward spiral of darkness is leaving bloody marks on my soul!
If you like it you will love it, if you don't like it you will hate it.