Archive for the ‘Action-Adventure Movie Reviews’ Category

« Older Entries

Get Low Movie Reviews, Ratings, Trailer and Opinion

Tuesday, August 3rd, 2010

Get Low has a great opening scene. It’s dark outside, and a house is enflamed becoming totally destroyed while powerful classical music plays in the background. Get Low sets a strong mood from the very beginning. Unfortunately, there aren’t many moments like this in the film. There is a powerful moment when Felix is speaking at his funeral, his face in close-up and doing his best to stifle his tears.

Get Low is well acted by all involved, especially Bill Murray as Frank Quinn, an owner of a funeral home and Lucas Black, Frank’s protégé. Sissy Spacek as Mattie Darrow is completely wasted and isn’t really a flesh out character.

Most of the film revolves around setting up Felix’s funeral, whom Frank is all to happy to help with. The film is well-acted by the three main leads and even though the plot of the film might seem eccentric, the pacing of the film is very low-key and does its best to not heighten the absurdity of having a funeral while still alive.

The biggest weakness of the movie is it’s plodding pace. The movie drags and drags and is far from gripping. Maybe the MTV generation spoiled me, but Get Low is slow and hard to sit through. I wish Get Low did what its title promised and moved at a quicker pace. Get Low is 100 minutes long but feels much longer.

When it’s finally revealed why Felix became a hermit (and it’s obvious why since the film shows many clues that why Felix is doing what he is doing isn’t really a secret for the audience, which quells any questioning the audience might have as to Felix’s strange behavior), the answer is sort of stupid and unconvincing. Felix is supposed to feel guilty for his actions, but comes across as such a stoic man that it’s inconceivable that Felix would be racked with guilt.

Get Low has a few funny lines here and there (such as a sign which reads, “No Damn Tress-passing! Beware of Mule!”) and the acting is more than competent and the film is scenic, but the film also doesn’t grab the viewer. Get Low has about two dramatic scenes and it’s humor is dry at best. Its slow pacing makes the film a chore to sit through. While the film is technically well made, I wish the film was less pensive and more substantial. Get Low might mean getting down to business, but that’s not what this film does. If you have low expectations you’ll get more out of Get Low.

VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 9.5/10 (2 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)

Posted in Action-Adventure Movie Reviews, Drama Movie Reviews, G | View Comments

Salt Movie Reviews, Ratings, Trailer and Opinion

Tuesday, July 27th, 2010

Salt is nothing more than a fun popcorn movie. It’s well-made, but shallow. If you simply want to be entertained and don’t mind ludicrous plot holes, Salt gets the job done.

Salt is the story of Evelyn Salt, a CIA agent who is accused of being a Russian spy. The movie has her being chased by her fellow co-workers while the audience wonders if Salt is who she claims to be. This ambiguity remains throughout most of the film and provides most of the suspense.

Unlike Inception, Salt has no artistic pretensions. Salt is nothing but pure escapism and it knows it. The movie (unlike Inception) doesn’t pretend to be smarter than it is. Phillip Noyce knows the kind of movie he is directing and doesn’t give the film greater importance than needed. Salt isn’t a deeply probing film which questions the way we live and our values. It’s simply a fun way to pass the time. Too many mainstream big-budget films pretend to be something they’re not, so it’s refreshing that Salt knows what it is and doesn’t pretend otherwise (only the characters do).

After Salt questions Orlov (Daniel Olbrychski), a man accused of being a Russian agent, and Orlov accusses Salt of being a Russian spy, the movie is mostly filled with chase scenes. The meeting between Salt and Orlov occurs within 20 minutes of the film (if not before).

The scenes where American Agents and Salt’s co-workers, Peabody (Chiwetel Ejiofor) and Ted Winter (Liev Schreiber) chases Salt (Angelina Jolie giving her typical charismatic performance) are fastly cut to leave our blood rushing and energy pumping. The movie is very fun, albeit far-fetched and corny (get it, because it’s a popcorn flick).

Phillip Noyce’s over reliance on music to add emotion and suspense and a weak ending are really the only flaws of the film (I mean there are a few plot holes here and there, but the movie moves so fast you won’t notice or care about them).

Salt works more as a condiment, adding flavor to the popcorn movie than as a full meal. As it stands, Salt is an entertaining, shallow, agreeable enough time-passer. If that’s all you look for in a movie, you’ll have fun watching the film. But if not, you’ll wish the movie added a little more spice with the Salt.

VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 10.0/10 (4 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: -2 (from 4 votes)

Posted in Action-Adventure Movie Reviews, All Movie Reviews, S | View Comments

Salt Movie – Best and Worst Movie Moments from Salt

Monday, July 26th, 2010

Salt, Phillip Noyce’s recent film, is a thoroughly average concoction. It’s also a very lucky film.  As many of you know, there have been talks of Russian spies entering America. That this is part of a true American fear (we Americans are such pus*ies!) makes Salt have some resonance. If the American people didn’t feel that a Russian takeover is coming soon (and the rational ones have no fears of such), Salt would come across as a lot more far-fetched then it is.

Salt is an entertaining tale of espionage but is so thoroughly average it’s grating.  Salt is an entertaining by the numbers popcorn flick.  It’s well directed, fast moving, builds up tension and is well acted. In terms of craftsmanship, the films only drawback is its musical score which is used throughout the entire movie. The music never shuts up and that there are no scenes without a musical score is a real weakness of the film. Music is like salt (the analogy is intentional); it’s supposed to add flavor to what’s on the plate, not replace it. Music should bring out more tension, not be the tension itself. Salt’s overuse of music is a big flaw of the film, especially where craftsmanship is concerned.

Salt is an entertaining movie about Russian spies and about Eve Salt (Angelina Jolie), an American agent who may or may not really be a covert Russian agent. This ambiguity leads to most of the suspense of the film. Salt doesn’t really have much of a plot. Most of the movie is spent on people running around and people chasing after them (mainly Salt).

Angelina Jolie does a good job as the charismatic and reserved Agent Evelyn Salt. The greatly underrated and underused Live Schreiber does an excellent job as Ted Winter, who works with Evelyn Salt. Live Schreiber does an excellent job making his character interesting and adding layers of ambiguity so the audience isn’t really sure of the type of person Ted Winter is.

Salt is fast moving and an agreeable enough time passer. It’s mainstream popcorn fluff well crafted. Salt is fun while you watch it, but by the time you leave the theater the movie evaporates from your mind. What Salt lacks in originality it makes up in adrenaline and high-octane excitement.

I do wish the film had a little more substance to it as well as having a storyline that ends. The ending of Salt is made to leave room for a sequel which is very annoying. Why can’t a film be self-contained anymore? I know movies are made to make money, but why does Hollywood feel the need to franchise every movie they think will be a hit?!

Salt isn’t a rarity among films and at ticket prices being what they are I wouldn’t suggest rushing to the theater to see Salt since they are many movies of similar ilk that can be found on DVD. But when Salt makes its way to DVD, it’s an agreeable enough time-passer to watch; it’s just doesn’t have enough of a salty kick to be worth checking out now.

VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 7.0/10 (1 vote cast)
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)

Posted in Action-Adventure Movie Reviews, All Movie Reviews, S | View Comments

Inception Movie Reviews, Ratings, Trailer and Opinion

Wednesday, July 21st, 2010

I must confess to something of a bias, but I’ve never been a big fan of Christopher Nolan’s work, especially when he serves as a writer as well. I feel he substitutes (or confuses) gimmicky for profundity. If Memento had the same dialogue, same actors, same story but was played in chronological order I doubt the movie would have been raved about as much as it was. Simply reverse the order of the movie and everyone is going ecstatic over it.

If Christian Bale spoke in the same voice as Batman and Bruce Wayne and Heath Ledger didn’t die young and tragically, The Dark Knight would still be a success but not on such a large scale as it was.

I don’t think it a coincidence that Christopher Nolan’s best films (The Prestige minus the last 10 minutes and Insomnia) were ones he didn’t write. Nolan is a much better director than he is as a writer. His directing is engaging, but his writing is pretentious. Inception is the most recent example of this.

I’m sure we all know what the plot of Inception is by now, but if you don’t I’ll humor you and explain it briefly. Leonardo DiCaprio stars as Dom Cobb who is an extractor. Cobb’s job is to remove ideas from people’s brain and he does this when the person is in a dream state. Cobb is assigned a different kind of job—instead of removing an idea he has to plant an idea inside the person’s mind deep in the subconscious so the person isn’t aware that the idea Cobb planted was his all along (and not Cobb’s); this process is known as inception.

There. You have the plot. Happy now? Me neither, but at least you are somewhat more contented.

Most of Inception has people (Cobb and his underlings) explain what inception is. There is way, way, too much dialogue and time spent on explaining things. The movie is close to 2 and a half hours long and could of easily been cut in half (it would probably be incoherent then, but I’m sure Nolan would prefer it that way).

The acting is on par with the acting in The Matrix—non-existent. Why is it in sci-fi and fantasy movies every character has to talk and act the same way? All of Cobb’s workers pretty much act and talk the same and no character is really individualized. The actor’s are simply spitting out Nolan’s inane dialogue hoping “complexity” will suffice.

It is revealed that when Cobb enters a person’s dream state, he sees images of his dead wife (whoops did I spoil something?), Mel (the enigmatic Marion Cotillard, whose talents is completely wasted in a flat role) and his children. There is a scene which explains the reason why Cobb always sees Mel in someone’s dreams. The reason why is straight out of Memento. We already saw the theme of guilt and the way it was portrayed in Memento. Why did Christopher Nolan have to be repetitive instead of thinking of a way to explain Cobb and his obsession that Nolan didn’t already use?

Cobb hires Ariadne (Ellen Page whose acting skills are also completely ignored here), an architect to build people’s dreams. I won’t bother explaining how it’s impossible to build an environment that is inside a person’s brain. Cobb explains how this is possible, but not in any convincing way.

Inception also stars Joseph Gordon-Levitt as Arthur, one of Cobb’s assistants (I’ll let you guess if Joseph Gordon-Levitt’s acting skills are displayed here).

Inception isn’t a total loss. After the first incoherent hour, the film does get progressively better the further it goes along. The scene depicting Cobb’s motive for being an extractor, while not entirely original is a dramatically moving moment. There are nice effects, camera shots and the music by Hans Zimmer isn’t overused and really adds flavor to the film’s surroundings. There is also a great scene when one of Cobb’s assistants survives a dangerous crash and turns to the people in back of him and says, “did you see that?” only to remember that they are sleeping.

I’m probably being a bit too harsh on the film. I guess because the film has been so universally praised (months before the film was even released) I feel the need to even the score and tone down the underserved hype and enthusiasm.

Inception isn’t as awful as I’ve made it sound, but with all the talent involved, Inception under-performs greatly (which isn’t so great).

VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 7.4/10 (25 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: +7 (from 29 votes)

Posted in Action-Adventure Movie Reviews, All Movie Reviews, I, Sci-Fi/Horror | View Comments

Inception Movie – Best and Worst Movie Moments from Inception

Friday, July 16th, 2010

“When something can be read without effort, great effort has gone into its writing”— Enrique Jardiel Poncela

“The best style is the style you don’t notice”— Somerset Maugham

“If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough”—Albert Einstein

The three quotes above aren’t just essential to great works or art, but to life as well, if only Christopher Nolan read them before he made Inception. Inception isn’t a bad film. It’s competently directed, has a good musical score that isn’t over-played, is ambitious and has some nice scenes. Inception is also unnecessarily convoluted (if you understand everything that’s going on within the first 10 minutes, you are one smart person) with overwrought dialogue that has the characters explain everything they are doing.

Inception doesn’t start off well and actually gets better as it goes along. Inception has been hailed as “this year’s Matrix” and it’s similar in that movie in many ways—it’s pseudo philosophical (philosophy for the sake of philosophy does not a philosopher make), plays with gravity (people walking upside down, cars driving vertically, buildings circling around itself) and deals with dreams vs. reality.

Christopher Nolan is a director who seems to believe that the more complex something is the smarter and more meaningful it is. As Dom Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio in brooding mode) says, “”The stronger the issues, the more powerful the catharsis.” Dom looks like Christopher Nolan himself and seems to be partly auto-biographical.

Dom hires Ariadne, an architect (played by Ellen Page) to enter into a person’s dream and construct a world that seems to be reflect reality (somewhat) so the person isn’t aware they are dreaming. Cob asks Ariadne to draw a maze that takes two minutes to make and one minute to solve. Cob keeps solving Ariadne’s mazes in a matter of seconds and asks her to keep drawing more models until it takes him a minute to solve the puzzle. Ariadne finally constructs a maze so complicated the audience doesn’t see Cob solve it. This scene seems to echo Christopher Nolan’s view of filmmaking—it must be hard to solve for it to be worth doing. If only Christopher Nolan knew what smart works of art really are.

Inception has moments of entertainment. The scene of a building rising from the ground and folding over itself while the camera follows the building and moves in the same direction is a neat trick. The scene that shows the origin of why Cobb decides to enter a person’s dream to either remove an idea of plant one is a powerful moment. Unfortunately, the pedantic and clamorous dialogue, the pretentiousness, and the almost non-existing acting (expect for Leonardo DiCaprio) make Inception intercepting Christopher Nolan’s themes and ideas instead of making Inception interesting.

VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 7.4/10 (20 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: +2 (from 8 votes)

Posted in Action-Adventure Movie Reviews, All Movie Reviews, I, Sci-Fi/Horror | View Comments

The Girl Who Played With Fire Movie Reviews, Ratings, Trailer and Opinion

Friday, July 9th, 2010

I thought of ending my review of Stieg Larsson’s The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo by writing, “if the second part of “The Millennium Trilogy” is half as good as the first one, the movie will be well worth seeing.” I stick to this statement, unfortunately The Girl Who Played with Fire (the second part of “The Millennium Trilogy”) isn’t half as good as The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo; it’s about a quarter as good. I was highly looking forward to The Girl Who Played with Fire, but unfortunately this film suffers the curse of the “sophomore slump.”

The first movie in the trilogy was directed by Niels Arden Oplev and written by Nikolaj Arcel and Rasmus Heisterberg, whereas the second movie had the same main characters but a different director and writers.  The second movie was directed by Daniel Alfredson and written by Jonas Frykberg. The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo was a very well-made blockbuster hit, so why change the director for the second installment, when Niels Arden Oplev did such a great job at directing the first? As the expression goes, “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”

While sometimes having different directors working on each part of the series can improve the series, like in the case of The Twilight Saga where each film got better than the one that  preceded it (or more accurately, less bad), if the  series starts on a high note to begin with why higher another pitcher?!

Niels Arden Oplev is a much better director that Daniel Alfredson. Mr. Oplev did a fantastic job in creating an immersive atmosphere, piecing together a complex plot into a cohesive whole, and making the audience feel emotionally invested while taking them on a kinetic ride. The twist and turns in the film felt real and the violence felt appropriately tense. The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo didn’t just have an intricate plot; it had a believable, emotional, and involving one.

Director Daniel Alfredson was unable to achieve what Mr. Oplev did. The Girl Who Played with Fire isn’t involving and is directed with any of the original style and passion that Mr. Oplev gave to The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. The sudden surprises in The Girl Who Played with Fire come across as laughable and lack the conviction of the first part of the trilogy. Unlike the first movie which brought the audience into the film to be a participant in trying to piece together the clues and find out what is going on, this film makes the viewer passive. We don’t work with the film, we simply see the twists and turns happening followed by expository dialogue while we shrug our heads.

The violent scenes in The Girl Who Played with Fire mostly appear as if people are just moving their arms while grunting instead of appearing like a real fight. There is a scene in the film where two men are fighting inside a building and they simply follow the choreography of a fight—they reenact what a fight should look like—instead of fighting naturally. They attack people with their arms while grunting every few seconds while their face remains emotionless. The fight scenes are certainly not convincing and there is even a use of slow-mo when falling from a fall, thereby making the fighting appear even less realistic.

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo seems as if the storyline, characters and actions are just going through the motions instead of having us buy into the manipulation that what is happening is real (which is something necessary for all movies to achieve in order to succeed).

There are one or two scenes of violence and shocks that do work and there is a line that Zala says to his daughter that did manage to put a lump in my throat, but there aren’t enough gripping moments in the film.

The plot concerns a murder mystery where an editor was murdered because he was about to expose sex trafficking and one of the ring leaders murdered him to prevent this expose from being leaked. The answer to the mystery and what leads to it isn’t interesting.

One of the best parts of the first film was seeing Mikael Blomkvist (Michael Nykvist) and Lisbeth Salander (Noomi Rapace) working together and seeing the dynamics of their relationship. Unfortunately, Mikael and Lisbeth are separated through most of the film and for some reason neither of them is as interesting to watch as in The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo. I liked the characters of Mikael and Lisbeth  and the audience felt some compassion for them, which  this film  doesn’t have.

Not even the bad guys in this film are menacing and interesting. Georgi  Staykov as Alexander Zalachenko says mean things but isn’t an interesting character and doesn’t come across as evil enough. Zalachencko’s henchman, the big, strong blonde man is also bland. There is no bite to any of the people where we are interested enough to care about the story.

As uninvolving, uninspired, with dull characters and a story filled with plot holes and a lack of credibility, the movie does have its share of good lines, such as after a man is beaten up and taken to the hospital someone visits him and asks how he is feeling. “Wonderful” is his expression. Another good scene is when Mikael goes to one of the pimps and tells him about the expose he is going to reveal about him and his illegal business. “Don’t you realize that this is going to ruin my life?” the pimp says to Mikael. “Yes,” Mikael responds nonchalantly; then the two of them just stare at each other blankly as the scene ends. Unfortunately, there are too few good scenes in the film.

I was really  looking forward to The Girl Who Played with Fire, but the film underachieve and lacks the excitement, bite, originality, and well-drawn characters of The Girl With the Dragoon Tattoo. This film is strictly going through the motions. The first film seemed to care about what it was making and didn’t let the success of the novels the movie is based on remove any artistic integrity. The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo didn’t just want to make a blockbuster hit, but cared about making quality work, whereas here, the most important thing the filmmakers seem to care about is picking up their pay check for cranking out what they perceive to big another big hit.

VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 8.0/10 (1 vote cast)
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Action-Adventure Movie Reviews, All Movie Reviews, Foreign Film Movie Reviews, G | View Comments

The Girl Who Played With Fire Movie – Best and Worst Movie Moments from The Girl Who Played With Fire

Friday, July 9th, 2010

The Girl Who Played with Fire, the second part of  Stieg Larsson’s The Millennium Trilogy,” isn’t near as successful as the first part—The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo—was. First of all, the movie doesn’t work as a unified piece. Those who only see this film will see a movie without an ending and without the character depth that was given to both Mikael Blomkvist (Michael Nykvist) and Lisbeth Salander (Noomi Rapace). Mikael and Lisbeth were interesting people in The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, but not so here.

The Girl Who Played with Fire does give a more complete back-story of Lisbeth, but what happened in Lisbeth’s past isn’t near as interesting as the teasing title of the books and films would suggest.

The characters in the film, as well as the story aren’t near as interesting and involving as in The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. If only the original director and screenwriters were involved in this film as well, the film could have been a success. I just hope they hire them back for the last part of the trilogy so at least the series can end on a high note. Here’s to a high hopes that the next chapter will be a success. If you haven’t seen The Girl with the Dragoon Tattoo, see it now, seeing The Girl Who Played With Fire will only lead to disappointment.

VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 7.0/10 (1 vote cast)
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Action-Adventure Movie Reviews, All Movie Reviews, Foreign Film Movie Reviews, G | View Comments

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo Movie – Best and Worst Movie Moments from The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

Friday, July 9th, 2010

John Waters once said that “no more should be longer than 90 minutes” and Roger Ebert said, “No good movie is too long, and no bad movie is too short.” The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo compromises the debate between the two. I assume that what John Waters meant was that a movie shouldn’t be longer than it needs to be. If it takes you an hour to say what you need to say, make a short film and if it takes you three hours make a long movie. I believe what John Waters was talking about is that a movie should have no dead weight. A movie shouldn’t be epic and long simply for the sake of being so.

The movie, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo proves the aforementioned point. The film is 2 and a half hours long, but it needs to be. Not a moment should be edited out or added in. The film is edited and directed seamlessly. Perfectly cut so the fast pace is maintained throughout.

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo has plot twists on its plot twists, breathtaking and tense scenes, characters the audience cares about, humor and heartbreak. The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo has everything you could want in a summer movie. The movie isn’t a deep psychological study. It isn’t profound in anyway. It’s fluff. Fluff with violence and sadism, but fluff all the same. But who cares. Fluff has to be well-crafted too and is no easier to make than deep, intellectual pictures. If you go to the theater to be transplanted into a unique world and be entertained, you could do far worse than The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and (if you want to see a movie still playing in theaters then you could do) not much better.

VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Action-Adventure Movie Reviews, All Movie Reviews, Foreign Film Movie Reviews, G | View Comments

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo Movie Reviews, Ratings, Trailer and Opinion

Friday, July 9th, 2010

The film, The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, based on the novel published posthumously by Stieg Larsson (whose original title was the less subtle and more provocative, Men Who Hate Women) is 2 and a half hours long with nary a wasted frame. The movie is long but not necessarily and I was shocked that 2 and a half hours went by so quickly.

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is a dazzling mystery filled with many twists and turns. But the revelations come from the piecing together of clues and deduction the characters partake in instead of just having surprises cobbled at random. There are no red herrings and if there are, none that the spectator notices or cares about. There was no smell of fish in the theater and if there was then if must have been my feet.

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo opens with investigative journalist Mikael Blomkvist (Michael Nykvist) being found guilty and serving three months for committing libel. Mikael has six months until he has to serve his sentence.

The story also deals with hacker Lisbeth Salander aka “the girl with the dragon tattoo” (Noomi Rapace) who is paid to hack into Mikael’s computer and look at all his files and documents which prove or disprove the truth of the libel suit.

Mikael and Lisbeth gradually converge and work together to solve a case about what really happened to Harriet, the favorite family member of Henrik Vanger (Sven-Bertil Taube), who hasn’t been seen since the 60’s. Mikael is hired to find out what happened to Harriet. Was she killed and if so who killed her? And if not, then what caused her disappearance? There are many exciting revelations that are fascinating to discover whether the logic behind them holds water or not.

In most mysteries, the audience is asked to sit back and enjoy the twists and turns the story takes and to forgive the filmmaker for any lapses in consistency and/or logic. I’m not sure if all the many shocks are possible but the viewer won’t care. There are so many plot complications and fascinating characters that any flaw in the story is a moot point.

The movie might be 2 and a half hours long, but we aren’t bored one minute since there is enough material here for at least three movies. Though there is a lot going on, the movie never feels rushed, which can often happen in a film filled with so much happening. There is a lot going on in the film but not in a way that drowns the viewer with information. You have to pay attention to all the details since the film has faith in the audiences’ intelligence and never says things more than once or goes into expository dialogue.

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is one of the best thrillers to come along in quite some time. The movie is almost too good to seem like a movie made nowadays. The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is as good as the thrillers from the 70s and might be the best one since The Marathon Man.

This is clearly a movie directed by a skilled craftsman. Filled with excellent shots, a good use of music and cinematography. Niels Arden Oplev does a great job at directing the film and maintaining an excellent pace. Nikolaj Arcel and Rasmus Heisterberg do an excellent job translating Stieg Larsson’s novel to the screen. I didn’t read the book the movie is based on, although now I wish I had.

What really makes The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo fascinating to watch are the characters in the film. Every actor does his AND HER (I don’t want to be one of the men who hate women) job superbly. Noomi Rapace goes an excellent job at playing the withdrawn Lisbeth. Although her character is a little too smart to be believable, this is really just a minor quibble. Michael Nyqvist does a great job as Mikael. Special kudos should go to Peter Haber as Martin Vanger, Sven-Bertil Taube as Henrik Vanger, but really there’s not a bum performance in the bunch.

There is a physical relationship between Mikael and Lisbeth. It is typical in films to have co-workers get romantically involved with one another and this is usually done in an ingratiating way. What isn’t typical is the offhanded way it is done here. There are no mushy, insincere exclamations of love. Just casual sex. Which I like. And I find much more honest.

There is a scene in the film when Lisbeth walks up to Mikael’s bed and they f**k. After they are done with what they are doing (which is each other), Lisbeth walks away from Mikael’s bed and nonchalantly says, “Good night.” This scene perfectly encapsulates a moment that too many movies rob us of—knowing the difference between hormones and love.

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo makes us care about what is happening and who it is happening to, which is essential in not just a good mystery but any good movie which unfortunately too few seem to possess.

The movie is confident in its style but not brash about it. The facial expressions, close-up shots on people’s eyes and the use of music all work together to create a symphony of mood, character and feeling.

For those with soft stomachs, be forewarned that the violence on display is unflinching. It isn’t exploitative but shows the importance of what make people who they are isn’t what happens to them but how they react to what happens.

The original title of the film seems more appropriate in certain ways as this film does seem to have a feminist bent to it and shows how women are abused by men and the double standard when they show similar behavior patterns. A nice subtle moment in the film is when Lisbeth is walking down the subway and accidentally bump into a bunch of men. They are pissed that someone, no matter how innocent and unintentional, would dare touch them that they punch Lisbeth in the face, throw her against the wall and pour beer all over her body, then when Lisbeth is defending herself by taking a shard of glass from the remains of the bottle that the men smashed her with, one  member of the gang says, “let’s get out of here, this cu*t is crazy,” thereby showing how she is called the crazy one and the gang who attacked her views themselves as the victim.

Stieg Larsson’s The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is well worth your time. Smart, sophisticated, superbly acted with well-drawn characters, and so entertaining you forget that you are in the theater watching a movie and feel as if you are inside the screen caught up in all the excitement. The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is the first in what I hope will be an excellent trilogy. I eagerly wait for the next installment as the series if off to a great start.

VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 10.0/10 (1 vote cast)
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Action-Adventure Movie Reviews, All Movie Reviews, Drama Movie Reviews, Foreign Film Movie Reviews, G | View Comments

The Twilight Saga:Eclipse Movie Reviews, Ratings, Trailer and Opinion

Monday, July 5th, 2010

When I was in high school there was a teacher who spoke to our grade. The teacher told us a story he said was true. One night, a couple of friends got into one of their father’s car and started calling their best friends on the phone. They said that they borrowed one of their father’s car and decided to commit suicide by crashing into a tree and that they wanted to let their friends know about this but to not have them call the police to try to stop the suicide. The friends listened to their request and the two boys ended up dying because of it.

The point of the story was to ask what being a true friend is about. Is being a true friend being a yes-man and letting their friends do whatever they want? Or is a true friend someone who does what’s best for their friends even if it goes against the friends’ request and will anger the friends? What should the friends have done? Should they have just followed their friends request or should they call the police? And if your friend is so miserable that death seems like a release should the friend do his best to convince the person otherwise or make sure he won’t be able to kill himself and end up leading a long, miserable life? There are many different opinions and the answers aren’t always so clear.

Love can be selfish. Is having a parent say yes to all of his children’s wishes so they end up becoming selfish, lazy parasites who feel the world was only meant for them a good idea? I would say not? But how about parents who disown their children if their children don’t end up the way their parents want them to; parents who kick their children out of the house if their children end up having a different religion, sexual orientation, or career as them. Such behavior is also an example of destructive and selfish love.

Is true love saying, “yes, dear,” even if it hurts the dear? Or is true love making sure the person they love has the best life possible? These questions seem to be addressed in the latest Twilight movie, Eclipse. These questions aren’t explored as deeply as possible, but that a mainstream blockbuster whose primary audience is adolescent girls to even explore these issues is something worth giving props to. Especially considering how superficial the last two Twilight movies are.

Eclipse is easily the best movie in Stephanie Meyer’s Twilight Saga thus far. Although considering the quality of the first two Twilight movies, saying Eclipse is the best Twilight movie is like saying to someone, “you look good—for your age.” The first Twilight movie was insufferable. Slow, melodramatic, ugly cinematography, and no story. The second movie was better. It was watchable and at least had a story to it but was also melodramatic, absurd, and very corny. The third movie, Eclipse isn’t without its flaws, but at least has a plot that can hold itself together.

Eclipse begins when Bella (Kristen Stewart) is about to graduate high school and enters “the real world.” What makes Eclipse the best movie in the Twilight series are three things. One is having a story that deals with the vampires and werewolves instead of just focusing on the romantic elements of the story. The first two movies were mainly all romance and though it had characters who are werewolves and vampires, the films rarely showed why they were important to have in the story. Whereas in Eclipse, about 50% of the movie was focused on the fantasy elements and the other half was focused on romance (I know, I know, you are saying these are the same thing, but I’m being sincere here), which makes Eclipse not only a more well-rounded picture but one where people who have balls aren’t ashamed to see and can actually enjoy.

The second thing that makes Eclipse the best of the series is that the movie isn’t near as over-the-top when dealing with how Bella and vampire, Edward (Robert Pattison) act and feel about each other. The first two Twilight movies had its share of unintentional funny lines, but here, the funny lines are funny on purpose. Most of the main characters in the film are attractive and since Twilight knows its main audience is teenage girls, the Twilight movies have scenes of attractive men with six-pack shirtless. These scenes do nothing put provide eye-candy and are truly ridiculous. Eclipse at least acknowledges this absurdity by having Edward say to Jacob (Taylor Lautner), “don’t you own a shirt?” during one of Jacob’s many bare-chested scenes.

And lastly what makes Eclipse the best in the series is having a more realistic idea of what love is instead of the typical “I’ll love you and do anything for you” cliché that suffocated the first two Twilight movies. That the film shows even some cynicism of what love is shows that the series is growing up. The film shows the idea that when a person is in love, his lover can twist him around her little finger to do what she wants, even if it hurts her lover, such as what Victoria does to Riley—when she asks Riley to sacrifice his life as a sign for his love towards her when in reality Victoria is asking Riley to sacrifice himself so Victoria can hurt those who hurt her previous love.

Jacob is in love with Bella and tries to do what he can to convince her to choose him over Edward. Jacob and Edward are natural enemies who decide to not hurt each other for Bella’s sake. Jacob asks Edward, if Bella chooses Jacob, will Edward kill him? Edward says, no. Edward doesn’t even want to turn Bella into a vampire. What Edward wants most of all is for Bella to live a meaningful and happy life even if it means losing Bella forever and if Bella decides to love Jacob, killing him would only make Bella miserable which is not what Edward wants. These scene shows the idea that what true love is not seeing how the person you love can make you happy, but how you can make the person you love happy—even if it hurts yourself.

Edward’s sister, Rosalie (Nikki Reed in an awful performance) tells Bella that she was in love and married to a man and one day saw her husband’s true colors and how abusive he was and how love distorted her perception of him. This idea that love is blind is a nice realistic element to the film and shows that just because Bella seems to love Edward that doesn’t mean her perception of him is accurate. Love can distort us. Love isn’t only blind, but can make us blind as well the movie seems to be saying. This honesty and mature realism adds a cynical and realistic layer that was missing in the first two Twilight movies.

Eclipse, though much more grown up, less melodramatic with more of a story than the other Twilight movies, Eclipse still has its flaws. While the acting in the film isn’t bad, it isn’t great either. Every character in the film is flat and uninteresting and the film still has its share of overwritten dialogue.

Eclipse is probably the best directed movie of the Twilight series thus far and the most honest, but Eclipse is only good in comparison to the first two Twilight movies, but not a good film on its own merit. Eclipse still comes across as slow, over-the-top, and uninspired, just less so compared to Twilight and New Moon.

Just so readers know Eclipse is completely incoherent if one didn’t see the previous two films.

When Bella says why she wants to be a vampire at the end of the movie, this only makes the theme of the film that much richer and clearer. I’m not going to spoil the ending, just to say that it ends nicely (certainly the best ending of the series so far). And Anna Kendrick as Jessica steals every scene she is in and even gives a good graduation speech about trying to live a life of making mistakes and learning from them instead of deciding one’s fate blindly; that mistakes is a part of growing up and without having them leads to a less meaningful and conscientious life.

I thought I would hate Eclipse, but now I am eagerly awaiting the next Twilight movie to see what happens next. Twilight and New Moon were immature films that didn’t understand how the world really works and lived in a state of idealism. Eclipse shows Bella, Edward and the rest of the gang growing up.

VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 5.5/10 (2 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: -1 (from 1 vote)

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in Action-Adventure Movie Reviews, All Movie Reviews, E, Romance, T | View Comments

« Older Entries