The Movie Review and Discussion Thread

[Pondosinatra]

The Maze Runner



Director: Wes Ball

Main Stars: Dylan O'Brien, Kaya Scodelario, Will Poulter, Ki Hong Lee, Aml Ameen

Rating: 4 out 5

Thomas (O'Brien) wakes up in an elevator that's ascending a seemingly infinite shaft. Once he finally reaches the top he finds himself forgetting his name and who he is and surrounded by a bunch of teen boys who seem amused at his disorientation. Eventually he discovers that they are all trapped in a massive glade and the only exit is through a foreboding labyrinth that only a select few called Maze Runners are allowed to enter. If there's any hope of them escaping he must break the rules and enter the maze. How to describe this? Think Lord of the Flies meets The Cube. Obviously I was enthralled with the concept. One of those 'what's going on here?' type movies that I love so much. While the story of reluctant hero rising above adversity to save everyone has been done to death for me it wasn't that big a deal as I was so invested in finding out the mystery of the maze. That said, kudos for introducing the female character and not having the typical love story subplot dreck that seems to be mandatory these days. And while most of the time is spent keeping the maze a mystery and thus keeping the audience in suspense, when they finally get in there I wish more time had been spent exploring that world. Still, that's a minor quibble. Not having read the book I can't comment on how closely the movie follows it, but having seen the movie I definitely want to read the book now. A pleasant surprise.

[Downsouthdevil]

Good list. Impressive.

[Al_The_Strange]

Jupiter Ascending

There are some sci-fi films that take viewers to strange new worlds, but there aren't many at all that take viewers on a roller-coaster ride through a fantastic universe full of intergalactic kingdoms so huge that they make the Earth look puny. In the Watshowskis' latest film, they dive into the staggering possibility that there are interstellar dynasties much larger and older than the Earth, which remains totally oblivious to their ancient schemes.

As expected, the spectacle is huge, lavish, and larger-than-life. Some of the special effects are beautiful, showing incredible spaceships and planetscapes. There are a lot of fights and chases that involve high-speed alien ships, bizarre weaponry, and huge setpieces. As epic as the film is, it still takes the time to pace the characters through their discovery of the larger universe, allowing the plot to unfold at a laid-back pace. Through it all, the film never fully takes itself seriously; there's enough mild humor in the mix to keep the tone upbeat, without being overly silly. It's every bit as much of a fun thrill ride as movies like John Carter, or 1998's Lost in Space. If that sounds like fun to you, then you'll likely enjoy Jupiter Ascending as well; if not, then don't bother.

The story for Jupiter Ascending is basically a fairy tale set in space, following in the same formula as Cinderella. It also borrows some cues from The Matrix, especially in regards to featuring a main character who discovers that there's a larger truth that everybody else is oblivious to. As various mysteries are solved and the overarching conflict is revealed, the villains' plot proves to be a pretty smart "what if" idea that can stagger the imagination. Unfortunately, these ideas tend to be sidestepped by the characters and the action. I felt the characters were fine for what they were; Jupiter Jones has enough of a backstory and motivation to make her story halfway interesting. However, relating to her and the other characters tends to strain some viewers' abilities, making the experience a hit or a miss.

The film looks marvelous, with good photography and editing. The actors seem to get a lot of criticism in this film. I could take or leave Channing Tatum's typical tough-guy wolfman role, but I was fairly enamored by Mila Kunis (although not everybody will enjoy her performance). Other actors can be a hit or a miss, but they all show some color and flair. Writing could be more focused, but the dialogue does carry the signature brand of Watchowski wit, intelligence, and charm. This production boasts pretty good-looking sets, props, costumes, and special effects. Music is quite bombastic and adventurous.

While not everybody will enjoy this film, I felt it was a perfectly fine piece of adventurous escapism, which taps into the same energy and sense of fun I've always enjoyed in films of the genre. I'd even say that if this film was more serious, it'd be dull. If you're a fan of the genre or directors, this is worth seeing at least once.

4/5 (Entertainment: Good | Story: Pretty Good | Film: Good)

Recommendation: For genre/director fans.

3D in the theater was pretty good at times, but not mindblowing. I'd rank the 3D a 3.5/5.

Chances are great that I'll grab a Blu-Ray copy. Not sure if I'll wait for a sale or not though, we'll see how badly I want it later.

[Al_The_Strange]

Happy Valentine's Day. For the heck of it, I popped in:

Crocodile Dundee

From the wilds of Australia comes a man who fought a crocodile and lived to tell the tale. He's a man who can survive in the bush, stare down wild animals, hang out with natives, and can put up a fight if he needs to. But when Mick Dundee is transplanted to the concrete jungle of New York, all his skills suddenly mean jack squat, and hilarity ensues.

The film is pretty mild, lightweight, laid-back entertainment. The comedy is often pretty funny, as Dundee's sheer naivety in the city leads to a number of amusing episodes. There's an occasional moment of action, where he has a bad run-in with pimps or thieves. What really makes the film charming are its characters; Mick Dundee is a cool dude who's so down-to-earth, laid-back, and friendly that he becomes perfectly lovable. Some of the film's funniest moments occur through the subtleties in which his down-under background contrasts with the urban setting.

This is a pretty simple fish-out-of-water tale, strung together with a number of brief episodes that could easily be cut up and seen independently. It is also a film of two halves - one half set in Australia and the other in NY - and both halves are used to show the two leads exploring each others' world and growing closer to each other from those experiences. Thus, I see it as a romance movie first and foremost, for it is the romantic struggle that takes precedent over the cultural clashes and comedy vignettes. As a romance, there are some really nice scenes to behold, and it reaches a feel-good climax. What makes the film work the most are its characters, who are never fully good or bad, and feel like real people because of it. It's also refreshing to see how Dundee wins out in every situation because of his friendliness and earnestness, moreso than kicking butt.

The film looks splendid, with decent photography and editing. Paul Hogan is impeccable as the title character, Linda Kozlowski is pretty and likable as Sue, and everybody else is okay. Writing is pretty fun (you would have to be living under a rock to have never heard the "now that's a knife" gag before). This production uses really great-looking locales, adequate sets and props, and great costumes (seriously, I can't stop staring at Dundee's outfit...where can I get a jacket like that?). The music score is really good too.

A bit fluffy and light perhaps, but Crocodile Dundee is one of my favorites, thanks not only to its cute comedy and occasional burst of action, but largely because the characters are iconic, and we can probably learn a little something from them and the way their interactions shape the world around them. It's worth seeing at least once.

4.5/5 (Entertainment: Very Good | Content: Good | Film: Very Good)

Recommendation: Rental.

On Blu-Ray, parts of this film look great, other parts not so much. Sound quality is okay.

PQ: 3/5, AQ: 3.5/5

[Astro Zombie]

Had a blast watching this!

F**king insanity. Granted, most of the hype has been saying the same thing, so I can understand someone being underwhelmed, but it's only February and I already feel like this will be one of the best theater experiences I have all year. It's one of the more enjoyable spy films in recent memory, and even takes the time to spoof some of the various spy/action movie cliches ("this isn't that kind of movie"). Colin Firth is all sorts of cool as Harry Hart, and can also rock a suit like no other. Samuel L. Jackson is the perfect person to play an over-the-top villain, only here he does it with a lisp and it's hilarious. And Taron Egerton does really well also, especially considering this is only his second film. Throw in a good supporting cast comprised of guys like Mark Strong, Michael Caine and Mark Hamill (!), and it makes the movie that much more fun.

There's no shortage of action throughout, but the centerpiece is truly the glorious church sequence. It really has to be seen to be believed, because it is complete lunacy, in the best way possible. The climax is also exciting, with another sequence that almost matches the church scene in craziness. That's really a recurring feeling throughout the film, it's crazy in all the right ways and never lets up. This will surely remain one of my favorite films of the year.

4.5/5

Review

[Al_The_Strange]

Kingsman: The Secret Service

"There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self." - Ernest Hemmingway
--------------------
British spies are so cool. They always dress sharp. They act like perfect gentlemen. Every little thing on their persons is some kind of hidden weapon or device. They always defeat the henchmen, save the world from megalomaniac supervillains, and get the girl in the end. With Kingsman, Matthew Vaughn uses the standard British spy movie schtick to distill all the best elements of his previous films: a little bit of the training scenes from X-Men: First Class, a large portion of the ultraviolence and attitude from Kick-Ass, maybe a drop of the hard-hitting drama from Layer Cake, and voila, we have a martini that's far more shaken than stirred.

Even though the film may seem derivative, it's still a total blast from beginning to end. The action is very stylish and incredible; the fight scenes are expertly-choreographed and filmed in a way that shoves it all in your face (in a manner that reminded me much of the way The Raid 2 was staged). As the film progresses, less and less is held back, and the film paints a colorfully brutal picture of the fantasy of being a British spy. A few scenes - the pub fight, the church scene, the fight with the main henchman, and a certain scene involving microchip implants - are incredible on their own and make the movie a must-see for anybody who can handle them.

I thought the story was good and well-told. It wastes little time in establishing a great cast of characters we can relate to and enjoy, going so far as weaving inspiring themes of what being a gentleman really means. The story strikes an excellent pace and it shows exactly everything it needs to for the plot to unfold and reach its incredible climax. It is a very dense and fulfilling tale.

The subtext, unfortunately, is where certain wires are crossed and it can leave some viewers feeling confused. This is a movie that often mocks the conventions of other spy movies (including the original James Bond series), but the film plays out in all the same conventions, making it feel rather hypocritical. Same goes for the violence; the film's shock value should make it appalling, but most of it could be seen as a glorification. Kick-Ass had these same issues as well, but the contrast between tone and content made it more successful at being darkly comedic. With Kingsman, the contrast is not as strong, and it's hard to tell what stance it's supposed to take on these issues.

The film looks sharp, with decent photography and very punchy editing. A few of the action scenes are pretty fast-cut and have some shakey cam, but this is a rare case where I felt the frenetic nature of the scenes worked to the film's advantage. Acting is swell; the whole cast is colorful and enjoyable to watch. There is a ton of unnecessary swearing, but otherwise the script is great. This production uses good-looking sets, props, and costumes. Special effects are sometimes good, sometimes so-so. The soundtrack is great too.

Kingsman is more outlandish than James Bond, gutsier than Jason Bourne, meaner than Jack Bauer. It's also colorful and nutty, a bit like 1998's Avengers, but far more successful at it. What makes it work is that it still has loads of style and action, but still tells a decent story. If you can handle the film's extremities, it's well worth the time.

4.5/5 (Entertainment: Perfect | Story: Good | Film: Very Good)

Recommendation: Yes, for mature audiences.

[Spirit Zero]

The Money Pit (1986)

One of the early Hanks comedies that cemented his position as one of the hottest upcoming comedy stars in Hollywood (after 'Splash'). Even though this movie has been overlooked for me its easily one of his better early movies. Although most of Hanks films have an abundance of heart this one also has a relatable subject in house renovation.

Tom Hanks (Walter) and Shelley Long (Anna) buy a huge country mansion that would normally go for around one million, but because the place is falling apart (unbeknownst to them) its going for $200,000. The initial joke being in this day and age this ginormous property would be selling for a lot more than one measly million, but that's to be expected. The laughs come thick and fast as they realise the mansion is a lemon and is literately coming apart bit by bit. They have been well and truly had by the previous owner.

Now far be it for me to nitpick at a light-hearted piece of comedy gold from the classic Tom Hanks 80's era but...lets go. The couple say they have no money whatsoever, indeed they have to borrow a shit-tonne just to buy the place, yet when they move in they are faced with massive repairs. The question that springs to mind is how on earth they afford to pay for all this. Sure both of them work so that will help but my God this mansion clearly requires some hefty workmanship that ain't gonna come cheap. Some of the things that go wrong are definitely laugh out loud worthy but Jesus the cost!!

Huge holes in the floor, a new bath tub, new electrics, new TV, new front door and surrounding wooden frame, broken windows, an entire new chimney both interior and exterior plus new fireplace, complete new plumbing, huge new wooden staircase, holes in the roof etc...Take into account that this is a property bordering on a stately home and most fittings will need specialist attention and most probably with handmade craftsmanship to boot! The staircase alone would of cost an absolute fortune, and then the entire chimney stack!! So I am left wondering how they could even begin to pay for all this on top of the fact they have borrowed money to buy the house. Hanks character does put down an initial down payment of $5,000 but I doubt that would even begin to cover much.

What is so sickly about the whole thing (so cutesy) is the fact that whilst all this is going on, in between all the horror that unfolds around them...both try and remain calm, expressing their love for each other and with Anna constantly reminding Walter everything will be OK. In reality I'm sure most people would have a break down. The weird aspect in the movie is that the building contractors appear to be this clan of fetish circus freaks. Big muscle men in bondage gear, little people and various types of punks all driving the type of vehicles you'd expect to find in the Mad Max franchise. Not really sure why they went down that route because it isn't particularly funny...just odd. I guess its suppose to freak you out because it looks like they're gonna ruin the place or squat there and the love birds will have more trouble on their hands.

I think people can relate to this movie simply because many will have experience of buying a place and having problems occur, be it down the line or straight away. I'm sure some will have experience that will have been just as horrific as in this movie, so watching this will certainly hit home for some. Indeed it does make you wince whilst watching, seeing this amazing mansion slowly crumble bit by bit, it does make your palms sweat at the thought of the spiralling costs whilst at the same time make you glad its not real...or its not you. Its all harmless fun with some good stunts, a bit of slapstick, a lovely real time house presumably combined with sets and an overly energetic Hanks. Oh and what's this...Anna's ex-husband is the main psychotic German henchman terrorist from 'Die Hard', how bout that.

6/10

[Josh B]

Cabin Fever: Patient Zero B

Not sure how to describe this movie, other than it's somewhere between horrible and great. Sean Astin is a welcome addition to the series, and once the movie ended I was left wanting more, as far as exploring his character. It's a low budget film, but the makeup and acting is top shelf in some scenes, so I honestly don't know what to make of Patient Zero. This series certainly has a charm to it.

[Al_The_Strange]

Before I review the movie itself, I feel compelled to reflect on the recent passing of Leonard Nimoy. It's like the last link in a chain of stuff that happened to me this week that inevitably made me think more about death, and it all hit me at once. I don't think I've ever felt more melancholy.

Earlier this week, I watched Watership Down for the first time ever. That in itself is sad, but the film's unique spin on the Grim Reaper and the little poem comparing death to a river made it oddly beautiful and compelling in the end. Then Mr. Nimoy passed away, leaving behind one last quote: "A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory. LLAP." Between these two beautiful sentiments, I couldn't help but to reflect on the issues of life and death some more. I needed something to lighten up so...I played an hour or so of Dragon Age. It's funny how video game violence can quell thoughts of death (well, okay, it's more like running around picking things up). But I really needed something happy, fun, nostalgic, and funny, and it doesn't get much better than Nimoy's own film, so full of life and humor. Sure, Star Trek II has its deep themes of life, death, and rebirth, but movie #4 is pure Nimoy. The man has left one heck of a legacy, not just as an actor or artist, but as a person. He will be missed, but if the last scene in Watership Down is any indication, he's probably boldly going where no man has gone before...and for him, hopefully it's a tranquil, happy place. Or, maybe true to the movie's title, maybe it's like going home.

So that's some of my thoughts lately...here's a movie review:
--------------------
Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home

"Admiral, we have found the nuclear wessel. And Admiral...it's the Enterprise!" - Walter Koenig

In Star Trek II, the Enterprise crew confronted Khan at a great expense. In Star Trek III, they confronted Klingons in a frantic bid to bring back Spock, at great expense. So naturally, in the fourth film of the classic Trek saga, with the Enterprise crew hanging around planet Vulcan in a captured Klingon Bird of Prey, they had to find their way back home. This film turns the voyage home into an adventure all on its own.

The film starts off pretty straight-faced, immediately tossing the Federation and Earth into peril to prompt the Enterprise crew to deal with it. The crew's solution - to travel back and time and save the whales - proves to be utterly ridiculous, but the film plays with so much tongue-in-cheek humor that it becomes a comedy classic. There are a few visually impressive moments, as the Klingon Bird of Prey skirts along Earth's oceans, but most of the fun in this film is the lighthearted fish-out-of-water comedy. What could be more hilarious than watching 24th century space explorers slumming around 20th century San Francisco, struggling against a seemingly-primitive society to solve high-tech problems? Some of the funniest and most endearing jokes include seeing Chekov roaming with with his Russian accent, asking where the "nuclear wessels" are. It's always a blast to watch Spock trying to get the hang of cursing, and ultimately using his nerve pinch on an annoying punk. And one of my favorite scenes is Scotty visiting an industrial plant, trying to use a 20th century computer by speaking to it.

The comedy makes the film entertaining throughout, but there's still enough problems and peril to make it roll evenly and effectively. It's a little derivative, but still a well-structured plot with quality characters. The film gets a little pushy with the whole "save the whales" theme, but it fits in the light and fluffy context of the overall picture.

The film looks good, with solid photography and editing. Acting is still great from the classic Trek cast: William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, DeForest Kelley, and the rest get even amounts of screen time to express their tongue-in-cheek humor with phenomenal results. Writing is quite witty. This production has some fine-looking sets, props, costumes, locales, and special effects. Music is really boisterous and happy-sounding, but strangely catchy.

Recommended!

4.5/5 (Entertainment: Very Good | Story: Good | Film: Very Good)

[Diesel]

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

[Show spoiler]Before I review the movie itself, I feel compelled to reflect on the recent passing of Leonard Nimoy. It's like the last link in a chain of stuff that happened to me this week that inevitably made me think more about death, and it all hit me at once. I don't think I've ever felt more melancholy.

Earlier this week, I watched Watership Down for the first time ever. That in itself is sad, but the film's unique spin on the Grim Reaper and the little poem comparing death to a river made it oddly beautiful and compelling in the end. Then Mr. Nimoy passed away, leaving behind one last quote: "A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory. LLAP." Between these two beautiful sentiments, I couldn't help but to reflect on the issues of life and death some more. I needed something to lighten up so...I played an hour or so of Dragon Age. It's funny how video game violence can quell thoughts of death (well, okay, it's more like running around picking things up). But I really needed something happy, fun, nostalgic, and funny, and it doesn't get much better than Nimoy's own film, so full of life and humor. Sure, Star Trek II has its deep themes of life, death, and rebirth, but movie #4 is pure Nimoy. The man has left one heck of a legacy, not just as an actor or artist, but as a person. He will be missed, but if the last scene in Watership Down is any indication, he's probably boldly going where no man has gone before...and for him, hopefully it's a tranquil, happy place. Or, maybe true to the movie's title, maybe it's like going home.

So that's some of my thoughts lately...here's a movie review:
--------------------
Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home

"Admiral, we have found the nuclear wessel. And Admiral...it's the Enterprise!" - Walter Koenig

In Star Trek II, the Enterprise crew confronted Khan at a great expense. In Star Trek III, they confronted Klingons in a frantic bid to bring back Spock, at great expense. So naturally, in the fourth film of the classic Trek saga, with the Enterprise crew hanging around planet Vulcan in a captured Klingon Bird of Prey, they had to find their way back home. This film turns the voyage home into an adventure all on its own.

The film starts off pretty straight-faced, immediately tossing the Federation and Earth into peril to prompt the Enterprise crew to deal with it. The crew's solution - to travel back and time and save the whales - proves to be utterly ridiculous, but the film plays with so much tongue-in-cheek humor that it becomes a comedy classic. There are a few visually impressive moments, as the Klingon Bird of Prey skirts along Earth's oceans, but most of the fun in this film is the lighthearted fish-out-of-water comedy. What could be more hilarious than watching 24th century space explorers slumming around 20th century San Francisco, struggling against a seemingly-primitive society to solve high-tech problems? Some of the funniest and most endearing jokes include seeing Chekov roaming with with his Russian accent, asking where the "nuclear wessels" are. It's always a blast to watch Spock trying to get the hang of cursing, and ultimately using his nerve pinch on an annoying punk. And one of my favorite scenes is Scotty visiting an industrial plant, trying to use a 20th century computer by speaking to it.

The comedy makes the film entertaining throughout, but there's still enough problems and peril to make it roll evenly and effectively. It's a little derivative, but still a well-structured plot with quality characters. The film gets a little pushy with the whole "save the whales" theme, but it fits in the light and fluffy context of the overall picture.

The film looks good, with solid photography and editing. Acting is still great from the classic Trek cast: William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, DeForest Kelley, and the rest get even amounts of screen time to express their tongue-in-cheek humor with phenomenal results. Writing is quite witty. This production has some fine-looking sets, props, costumes, locales, and special effects. Music is really boisterous and happy-sounding, but strangely catchy.

Recommended!

4.5/5 (Entertainment: Very Good | Story: Good | Film: Very Good)

I can't seem to find a way to thank this post multiple times.


I am not a Star Trek fan (barring the JJ films) and have only seen him in those movies...but EVERYONE knows who Spock is because of this guy and can even quote multiple lines of dialog from him DECADES after the fact even having not seen the movies. He is part of modern day vernacular, culture and peoples' very mindsets. And he was very well respected among his peers and people in general. RIP Mr. Nimoy.

[L-Rouge]

Great Review and reflection on Leonard Nimoy Al. I acknowledge De Kelley and James Doohan, I was saddened by their passing. Leonard's was different for me, very emotional, (which is rare). There is something about Spock that transcends the simple cause of character in a t.v show. Leonard owned that role, gave him believability, a heritage, a strong sense of loyalty and friendship. Arguably if there was no Spock, I am unsure how far Trek would have progressed.

well my heart says he was huge for trek!.

[Astro Zombie]

Not as good as the first, but still decent.

I wish I could say it's just as good as the first, but while there's still some laughs to be found, it lacks some of the charm of the first. A lot of this is due to the absence of John Cusack, who was apparently not even asked to return, which is weird since he was one of the best parts of the first. The other three guys are funny, no doubt, but Cusack really brought the whole group together and had great chemistry with them. Adam Scott was brought in as a replacement, and while he gets a few funny scenes it's not enough (he's not even the lead).

The other problem is the fact that it's not the 80s anymore, which, let's face it, is the best decade to travel to and the one with the most comedic potential. They don't get a lot of mileage off the future here, though two things in particular were great: the running gag about the driverless car trying to kill Lou, which was hilarious, and the futuristic game show hosted by none other than Christian ****ing Slater.

I still laughed more often than not, but I feel like it could have been much better. I suppose if you liked the first, you'll probably enjoy this one, at least the main cast tried their best. Oh, and those end credits...hilarious.

3/5

Review

[Spirit Zero]

All Quiet on the Western Front (1979)

Remake of the classic 1930's masterpiece which of course these days is very very old itself. Never really given the respect it deserved and not classed as good as the original but I found it just as hard hitting.

First thing I noticed was the story has been mixed up a bit, its not in the same order as the original, everything seems to have been translated across but in different stages of the film. This does actually work because it doesn't just seem like a carbon copy. There are also a lot more details in some sequences with different ideas for settings and locations, new angles and edits upgrading the whole film somewhat. Basically upgrading most aspects giving them a new modern spin (for the time).

On the whole it does look better in places, a good example I prefer being the bleak ending in this version over the original. Its still the same but with a slightly differently approach and NOT showing the sniper. All that is heard is the fire of a rifle and then a cut to Baumers hands as they react and his body slumps into the mud, possibly more effective and harrowing than the original 1930's sequence.

The cast are again solid for this adaptation with Borgnine playing the role of Stanislaus Katzinsky perfectly and maybe better than the original actor in 1930. Donald Pleasance is the German teacher whom regales the young German boys with propaganda and the glory of war. Holm as the over the top Corporal Himmelstoss giving him a slimy, backstabbing, cowardly glow and finally Richard Thomas looking just the part in his WW1 German uniform although coming across a little bland.

The scope isn't quite on par with the 30's version, its still very good and very bleak but its missing that epic feel which I guess is down to it being a TV movie. A shame really because this story deserves a much wider scope, none the less this version is still the business. The whole production is very authentic with good costumes, vehicles, landscapes, weapons etc...The battles are good but not overly grand whilst the waste of life, cheapness of life, desolation and despair is well conceived throughout. No shying away from the grim horrors of war when it came to the mud soaked trenches.

Its a shame this has been overshadowed somewhat as its a very good war film and manages to recreate WW1 just as well as its predecessor. Its still rough, gritty and somewhat shocking as it offers new perspectives from the last movie version of the story. Its easily a must see if you liked the 1930's film, its just as interesting, memorable and poignant.

7/10

[Al_The_Strange]

Dr. No

That's right, I'm kick-starting another full-blown James Bond marathon before Spectre comes out.

Not counting the 1954 made-for-TV rendition of Casino Royale, the film adaptation of Dr. No is where the cinematic saga of James Bond truly begins. Chances are that you already know the man, even if you've never seen the movies; Bond's image and swagger have permeated through pop culture for the past five decades, crafting the classic archetype and stereotype of a British special agent (look no further than Austin Powers, Archer, or Kingsman for many fine examples of how far and how long the Bond image has perservered). He is timelessly appealing through his smooth combination of charm, sophistication, and ruthlessness.

Dr. No introduces us to the rough and romantic adventures of Bond. It's nowhere near as action-packed as other movies in the series, but its simplicity as a spy thriller is what makes it elegant. There are just a few fights and chases; when they happen, they are modestly satisfying and thrilling. Most of the film's appeal will be in the smaller details; the way Bond dives into the mystery and sidesteps henchmen at every turn is expert and cool. It gradually builds up to an outlandish climax, in which Bond confronts the titular Dr. No in his secret lair, and has to stop his evil schemes. This becomes the fundamental template for future Bond films, but Dr. No stands out with its fair share of iconic scenes, including Bond's introduction during a game of Baccarat, a certain scene at a beach where Honey Rider makes her appearance, and a memorable dinner scene with the villain.

The story follows after Ian Flemming's novel faithfully, although many parts of the story are changed. The story unfolds pretty neatly, gradually introducing the audience to Bond, the various characters he encounters, and the exotic world he inhabits. The plot has a satisfying structure, filled with just enough thrills and mystery to keep it moving. Even though Bond himself is an alluring character, most of the people in the film are one-dimensional; hardly anything is revealed about their motivations to make them stand out above the definitions of their archetypes. However, they all have a worthy presence and are likable to some degree. The film overall plays out as a fine piece of adventure and escapism, but it's only a small taste of even greater things to come.

The film sports very good photography and editing. Acting is swell; Sean Connery is perfectly charismatic and iconic as James Bond, embodying all the right aspects to make his character shine even to this day. Joseph Wiseman is pretty stiff and robotic as the villain, but for interesting effect. I felt Ursula Andress was somewhat unlikable in her role; she's best seen for her looks. I enjoyed the performances of Jack Lord and most other players. Writing is not too shabby. This production uses very exotic and interesting locales. Sets, props, and costumes are quite old-fashioned, but still very slick. The music score features a lot of really funky calypso music, but Monty Norman's is an instantly recognizable tune that resonates to this day.

Dr. No is one slick thriller. Future Bond films will take the character to even more exciting adventures with even bigger stakes and bolder expressions, but this is the film that started it all, and it deserves a watch at least once.

4/5 (Entertainment: Pretty Good | Story: Good | Film: Very Good)

Recommendation: Yes.

[Pondosinatra]

Kingsman: The Secret Service



Director: Mathew Vaughn

Main Stars: Colin Firth, Taron Egerton, Samuel L. Jackson, Mark Strong, Mark Hamill

Rating: 2.5 out 5

As a young boy, Eggsy (Egerton) learns the news that his father has died serving for Queen and Country in an operation shrouded in mystery. Before leaving, the man (Firth) who told his mother this news gives him a pendant with a phone number on the back. He tells him that should he ever be in trouble to call it. Years go by and time has not been kind to his family. Poverty and violence are the norm. One day while sitting in jail after being involved in yet another fight he decides to call the number and overnight his life changes. When I saw the trailer for this I remember thinking it looked interesting although somewhat odd. Unfortunately that oddness continued throughout the movie. Full of humor one moment and violence the next, the film never seems to know what it wants to be. Is it serious? Is it a parody? Some have said it's simply a reaction to the super seriousness of the latest Bond films. Fair enough I guess, but for me the combination just didn't gel. Not all was bad however. I thought Samuel L. Jackson was hilarious in the role of the bad guy. I was also pleased to see Mark Hamill return to the screen. In fact, it took me awhile to recognize him. Egerton was also excellent in his transition from street kid to dashing spy as was Firth in the role of his mentor. And it may be that I'm just getting old, but I was actually annoyed by the non-stop F bombs. It wasn't in character for anyone and did nothing for the story. For what it's worth the audience seemed to love it. Me, not so much.

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by Pondosinatra

Kingsman: The Secret Service



Director: Mathew Vaughn

Main Stars: Colin Firth, Taron Egerton, Samuel L. Jackson, Mark Strong, Mark Hamill

Rating: 2.5 out 5

As a young boy, Eggsy (Egerton) learns the news that his father has died serving for Queen and Country in an operation shrouded in mystery. Before leaving, the man (Firth) who told his mother this news gives him a pendant with a phone number on the back. He tells him that should he ever be in trouble to call it. Years go by and time has not been kind to his family. Poverty and violence are the norm. One day while sitting in jail after being involved in yet another fight he decides to call the number and overnight his life changes. When I saw the trailer for this I remember thinking it looked interesting although somewhat odd. Unfortunately that oddness continued throughout the movie. Full of humor one moment and violence the next, the film never seems to know what it wants to be. Is it serious? Is it a parody? Some have said it's simply a reaction to the super seriousness of the latest Bond films. Fair enough I guess, but for me the combination just didn't gel. Not all was bad however. I thought Samuel L. Jackson was hilarious in the role of the bad guy. I was also pleased to see Mark Hamill return to the screen. In fact, it took me awhile to recognize him. Egerton was also excellent in his transition from street kid to dashing spy as was Firth in the role of his mentor. And it may be that I'm just getting old, but I was actually annoyed by the non-stop F bombs. It wasn't in character for anyone and did nothing for the story. For what it's worth the audience seemed to love it. Me, not so much.

lol, the whole time I didn't recognize Mark Hamill either. Here it is, weeks later, and I had to look him up and now it's like "oh yeah, that guy."

Even though I rated the movie a lot higher than you did, I can understand the issues you had with it.

[Al_The_Strange]

American Sniper

It's easy to romanticize about soldiers, but snipers have their own unique and alluring shroud of mystique. Any gamer can tell you how cool it is to play Call of Duty and be the hotshot camping out on some rooftop picking off bad guys all day long. In films, you can look at Enemy at the Gates or Barry Pepper's character in Saving Private Ryan and marvel at a sniper's deadly prowess. Far be it for me to comment on what experiences soldiers of any kind go through, I have no doubt that the reality of being a sniper is nowhere near as glamorous as the media makes it out to be; it's a burdensome duty in which one has to take lives indiscriminately in order to save lives. I can't even imagine the stress of having to evaluate who lives and who dies - to include women and children - in the heat of the moment.

The deadliest marksman in US history - Chris Kyle - is the focus of this film: the real-life Navy SEAL who served four tours of duty in the Iraq war. The movie tracks his career across all four tours, with occasional breaks where he reunites with his wife and has difficulty adjusting to civilian life. Thus, the film dishes out two different conflicts: the fight against al-Qaeda on one hand, and the struggle to adjust to life after war on the other hand. Both narrative strands offer their share of compelling scenes; the combat is quite intense and harrowing, while the family drama emphasizes stress and emotion aptly. Together, it's a consistently-engaging experience that will truly underscore the intensity of war, and the hardship of overcoming post-traumatic stress.

I have no idea how close the film adapts real-life events, but a few contrivances can be spotted easily. It is quite the black-and-white film that glosses over the complexities of the war. I almost pegged it as a pro-war movie, until the last act started to emphasize the futility of the war effort and illustrate the hardships of veterans. The film does outright refer to Iraqis as "savage;" it's probably meant to label the regime rather than the entire country or culture, but it can be taken the wrong way easily. There are strands of jingoism that will rub some viewers the wrong way.

All that being said, I was personally enamored by the characters; I found them easy to follow and relate to, and it made their journey in and out of war a compelling one. The film sets up an actual villain sniper that Chris has to take down; I don't know if this was invented for the movie or what, but I thoroughly enjoyed the sniper-vs-sniper plot. The film has its fair share of messages; on one hand, the film does emphasize the "this is why we fight" message, but on the other it digresses into the physical, emotional, and psychological damage on the characters and their families. These aren't subtle themes at all, but I felt the two together formed a point and counterpoint that keeps the film rather well-rounded.

This film uses good-looking photography and punchy editing. Bradley Cooper is excellent as the main character, and the other actors aren't too bad either. Writing is okay. All the sets, props, and costumes look authentic and creditable. Special effects are sparingly used, and mostly okay. Sound design is superb. Music is okay.

American Sniper is for snipers what The Hurt Locker is for guys who defuse bombs. I favor Am Sniper more though, because it doesn't have nearly as many stupid parts as THL, and Chris Kyle is a far more compelling character. The character is ultimately what makes the film most watchable, and with quality acting, it is well worth seeing.

4/5 (Experience: Good | Story: Good | Film: Good)

Recommendation: Since your views on this could hinge on your stance on the war and how sensitive you are to certain manipulations, I can only encourage a rental.

[Al_The_Strange]

The Drop Box

This will be the first documentary I've seen on the big screen. Was encouraged from a Facebook friend who said, simply, go see it.

At any given moment somewhere in the world, a mother will abandon her child. There are any number of reasons why this happens, but the end result is tragic, as unwanted infants and newborns are ditched in the street and left to die. In South Korea, over 200 infants were abandoned all over Seoul. In the absence of any kind of government-run method for accommodating these lost babies, one pastor takes it upon himself to set up a "drop box" for people to leave their unwanted babies, and he takes it from there.

This is definitely news-worthy subject matter that deserves awareness and debate. Controversy exists regarding the morality and responsibility of parents utilizing this system, but the film doesn't spend much time exploring that. The film's focus is simply on the fact that a baby drop box exists, and the film divulges into a more intimate look at pastor Lee Jong-rak and the 15 children he's taken in (among the 354 he's received through the drop box, which are passed to social services). It is quite the sentimental presentation that will flash nonstop baby pictures at you with sappy music in an effort to reach into your chest and yank your heartstrings. However, the film is not all fluff; it does take the time to expose the cold hard truth that mothers have all sorts of reasons to abandon their children (to include social or cultural pressure, which makes their case more compelling), and these children need help to survive. A lot of the children that are abandoned are disabled, and their deformities are shown on-screen to really emphasize their need for help. Some of the stories that the people tell are pretty rough, and it adds significant emotional weight to the issue.

The film's structure is somewhat random, intermixing stories of pastor Lee, the children, the larger issue, and other aspects together without a specific pattern. Really, the drop box in itself isn't much of a story; it's the human element that makes it stand out, and the film captures it and uses it to emphasize a key Christian message: the idea that all life has a purpose, and deserves to be preserved. The film even goes to far as divulging into how the various saved children are progressing through life, subtly suggesting that even abandoned children can be happy and have a future. One can't help but to admire pastor Lee for his efforts in spite of this (and thankfully, the Christian message is not all that overbearing, even though the sentimentality kinda is).

The film is pretty straightforward. There are a lot of tight close-ups of all the kids' faces. Some shots can be rather herky-jerky and some were out of focus, but most of the film looks okay. Editing is pretty decent; images are cut up effectively to help convey the subject matter well. There are some cheap animated segments that are cute, but ultimately unnecessary. The film itself isn't necessarily groundbreaking, but it gets the job done.

I would say that the film is worthwhile for bringing up awareness of the issue on a wider scale and possibly bringing up talking points. However, the film is most interested in putting human faces on all this, making it emotionally manipulative. I personally would have been more interested in a greater exploration of the social and moral implications of the drop box's usage. If you don't see this film being played at churches or schools or anything, it may be worth a look as a rental sometime (or you could just start reading up on it).

3/5 (Experience: Sappy | Content: Good | Film: Average)

Recommendation: Read the news.

[Diesel]

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

American Sniper

[Show spoiler]It's easy to romanticize about soldiers, but snipers have their own unique and alluring shroud of mystique. Any gamer can tell you how cool it is to play Call of Duty and be the hotshot camping out on some rooftop picking off bad guys all day long. In films, you can look at Enemy at the Gates or Barry Pepper's character in Saving Private Ryan and marvel at a sniper's deadly prowess. Far be it for me to comment on what experiences soldiers of any kind go through, I have no doubt that the reality of being a sniper is nowhere near as glamorous as the media makes it out to be; it's a burdensome duty in which one has to take lives indiscriminately in order to save lives. I can't even imagine the stress of having to evaluate who lives and who dies - to include women and children - in the heat of the moment.

The deadliest marksman in US history - Chris Kyle - is the focus of this film: the real-life Navy SEAL who served four tours of duty in the Iraq war. The movie tracks his career across all four tours, with occasional breaks where he reunites with his wife and has difficulty adjusting to civilian life. Thus, the film dishes out two different conflicts: the fight against al-Qaeda on one hand, and the struggle to adjust to life after war on the other hand. Both narrative strands offer their share of compelling scenes; the combat is quite intense and harrowing, while the family drama emphasizes stress and emotion aptly. Together, it's a consistently-engaging experience that will truly underscore the intensity of war, and the hardship of overcoming post-traumatic stress.

I have no idea how close the film adapts real-life events, but a few contrivances can be spotted easily. It is quite the black-and-white film that glosses over the complexities of the war. I almost pegged it as a pro-war movie, until the last act started to emphasize the futility of the war effort and illustrate the hardships of veterans. The film does outright refer to Iraqis as "savage;" it's probably meant to label the regime rather than the entire country or culture, but it can be taken the wrong way easily. There are strands of jingoism that will rub some viewers the wrong way.

All that being said, I was personally enamored by the characters; I found them easy to follow and relate to, and it made their journey in and out of war a compelling one. The film sets up an actual villain sniper that Chris has to take down; I don't know if this was invented for the movie or what, but I thoroughly enjoyed the sniper-vs-sniper plot. The film has its fair share of messages; on one hand, the film does emphasize the "this is why we fight" message, but on the other it digresses into the physical, emotional, and psychological damage on the characters and their families. These aren't subtle themes at all, but I felt the two together formed a point and counterpoint that keeps the film rather well-rounded.

This film uses good-looking photography and punchy editing. Bradley Cooper is excellent as the main character, and the other actors aren't too bad either. Writing is okay. All the sets, props, and costumes look authentic and creditable. Special effects are sparingly used, and mostly okay. Sound design is superb. Music is okay.

American Sniper is for snipers what The Hurt Locker is for guys who defuse bombs. I favor Am Sniper more though, because it doesn't have nearly as many stupid parts as THL, and Chris Kyle is a far more compelling character. The character is ultimately what makes the film most watchable, and with quality acting, it is well worth seeing.

4/5 (Experience: Good | Story: Good | Film: Good)

Recommendation: Since your views on this could hinge on your stance on the war and how sensitive you are to certain manipulations, I can only encourage a rental.

This is my favorite movie of the year so far, I'm counting it as a 2015 movie even though it technically premiered in 2014.

Granted it's only competition thus far is Kingsman, Taken 3 and Project Almanac....the highest of which is Kingsman at a 3.5/5.

I think I gave this one a 4.5 or a 4.75. I loved it.

[Diesel]

Now.....shall..we..begin.




Rewatched Star Trek Into Darkness tonight.
Side note: it still really bugs me that there is no colon in the title, and that the title is terrible for what the film is (I know why they claimed they used the name, but that doesn't make it better).

The film is absolutely not as good as the original, which is among my Top 25 favorite movies of all time, but it is still entertaining and enjoyable overall. The story is not nearly as tight and there are more 'dud' sequences this time around. There is still great fun to be had though and some really great sequences. The Klingon sequence and the Spock/Harrison sequence is definitely more than anything from the first film. (Is there anyone left that doesn't know

[Show spoiler]he was Khan

?)

Cumberbatch is also FANTASTIC in his role. If the writing was better (Kurtzman and Orci have really dropped off since the original Transformers and Star Trek) then he would have been the central antagonist and the movie would have been immensely better for it. He is just completely terrifying in his cold, harsh demeanor. His scene negotiating with Spock is probably the highlight of the entire film for me.

As for the blu-ray...this is the first time I watched it since I moved in my new place and got my new HT set up about 6-7 months ago. The audio is fantastic on this disc. I tend to keep my volume at 50% (give or take one notch depending on the individual disc) when watching movies, this one was down one notch as it was mastered a bit loud. I cranked it up to about 56% for the scene when

[Show spoiler]Khan's ship crashes into the city

and it was The buildings crumbling, the glass shattering, the people screaming, the ship being ripped apart, everything. So clear and powerful, but none of it over done like some mixes do with big sequences like that (Man of Steel is the one in my recent memory).

Rating - 4/5