Reviews

Expectations are huge when one sees the cast, director and setting for the Tourist. Von Donnersmarck made fame with 'Das Leben der Anderen', Depp nailed almost every movie he was in and Jolie....well I'm not really a big fan of her but he, she's hot.

But what a bitter disappointment this movie was. There is almost no chemistry on screen between Depp and Jolie. To my opinion, Jolie can only play one role and that's a hot mysterious woman who thinks modeling agencies are taking her picture in almost every scene of the movie.This woman can not act! This movie is like a fashion show for Jolie, overdressed in practically every scene and really, really exaggerates her acting as a mysterious woman with more than meets the eye. Depp disappointed me as well in this one, though he's actually nothing to blame because Jolie was the center of attention in practically every scene. The story is weak and dumb, the more attentive viewer may discover the 'big twist' quite early in the movie after which you just have to wait for the rest of them to find out. Nothing wrong with the setting though, Venice is stunning but they could have done so much more with it!

A very, very big opportunity missed hopelessly. Von Donnersmarck, please return to making great art-house movies what you do best. Depp, please return making great movies and portray mysterious, complex character as you do best. Jolie, please quit acting.

I'm from Holland, and we are not known for our great history of actors, let alone the Dutch cinema. Some of you might know Paul Verhoeven, Rutger Hauer and Black Book...but that's about it. So when a Dutch actor or actress makes his or her way to Hollywood (although some of the Americans despise Hollywood, in Holland it's still Mecca for movies), it's of national importance. Carice van Houten is our latest Dutch acting jewel who made her way to Hollywood with movies like Black Book, Valkyrie, Repo Men and the recent Black Death. She is a major reason why I'm writing this review.

In this review I would like to point out some good and some weaker elements in this movie. I will not give a summary of the plot, I'll just give my view on some things. So I know a lot of things will not be addressed in this review, sorry for that, just wanted to share some things with you.

GOOD

After watching this movie I could only think of one thing: this is a great piece of cinema! First of all the cast is very well selected. Eddie Redmayne and Sean Bean share the lead and they are both very strong characters. Redmayne impresses with his performance as a boyish monk who transforms in a hardened revenge seeker during the movie, due to the fact that he is torn between his dedication to the church and his forbidden love for a girl. Bean is good, as he always is in my opinion. Watching Bean was like watching a Christian version of Boromir, brainwashed by faith and dedicated to his goal.

And then there was Carice...

Stunningly beautiful, enchanting and mysterious, both lovable and scary and....well I can continue like this. She was just good, just so good.

Furthermore, the plot is a very strong element of this movie as well. Unpredictable and exciting, but always keeps your attention until the final narrative. Great setting as well, I thought it was shot in UK somewhere, maybe Ireland, but I didn't expect this movie to be shot in Germany! Kudo's for Germany...

BAD

I thing BAD is a strong expression and does not really apply to anything concerning this movie. Although I have some mixed feelings about the underlying theme: the question whether there is a God or not and how to deal with religion in times of the plague. My major concern with this theme in this movie is that at the end, there is no real statement about what's right and what's wrong, or who was right and who was wrong.

For instance: our Christian crusaders slaughter everybody who is against their faith in name of the Bishop (or God, or the Church, or Christianity), so to say that these crusaders are lovable people...no not really. Than the village-people, who seem to be nice at first, but the more intelligent viewer will conclude that they are not what they seem at all. After they show their real nature, they are not that lovable as well. Even the holy monk turns out to be a bad- ass revenge seeker at the end!

Conclusion: God and Christianity suck big times (concerning our knowledge of the Middle Ages we already knew that), atheists suck as well (the sad thing is, in real life, most Americans will agree on this one) and even a man from God himself is not trustworthy.

The end of the movie does justice to it's title: this is a very BLACK movie.

All in all this is a movie you must see. Very interesting and intriguing on many levels, with a good plot, great setting and even better actors!

When I first heard the announcement of this movie I was thrilled. I usually like Adam Sandler and Kevin James in leading roles, Spade and Schneider are no actors who can carry a movie but as part of this cast it might work out for them and I'm not a Chris Rock fan but heah, 4 out of 5 should work. In this review I'll give a short review of the plot, after I will present my interpretations of some flaws which ruined the movie for me.

This film is basically about 5 grown ups, who formed a basketball-championship winning team back in '78, but now lead totally different lives. They are reunited after their basketball coach passes away. For some unknown reason our five protagonists share a weekend with their families after the funeral. Until this moment, the viewer waited and waited for the movie to begin, to develop towards some funny or unpredictable plot turns, but they never come. During the rest of the movie the five come to realize their lives aren't that bad and that their '78 opponents should realize that their lives are not that bad either. And what's a better way of pointing that out than a rematch which is, surprisingly, won by the other team. A weak moral statement to end the movie.

So why doesn't this movie work as it should?

• First, five 'leading' roles is too much for this movie. Result: very little character information and development. All characters are introduced in 2 minutes, so how should we feel sorry at the end of the movie for Kevin James that he isn't the head of some store like he told us in 10 seconds at the beginning of the movie? I didn't even know what he did until that moment. And how can we show empathy for Schneider who failed his past three marriages?

• Another thing which bothered me the entire movie was the fact that, let's say, 75% of the jokes were just bad. The whole movie felt like the five protagonists had a reunion but the viewer was not invited. Even worse is the fact that when one made a joke, others laughed on screen!! Felt like the first 3 seasons of Friends... An example of such a joke is when Spade makes fun of Sandler because he is fat. (a joke which will return at least 4 more times and seems to be funny to the others again, and again, and again and again). But common! Everybody who has seen Spade perform before knows HE is the one who gained weight. Furthermore, the 'Kevin James is fat' jokes are already milked in practically every episode of 'The King of Queens', so for all future movies with Kevin James a strongly suggest: ''Stop the Kevin James fatty jokes! We know the man is fat, but it's just not funny anymore.''

• In the same category as the latter point we can put the character and performance of Chris Rock. Rock doesn't fit in this company at all. Rock needs a movie in which he can at least say 50 times that he's black and how black people are disadvantaged by society and make jokes about other black people. I once saw a stand-up comedy show of him and I did not now one man could make so much jokes about how black people have a hard life, etc. etc in 2 hours. In this one, he is houseman, and is doesn't work out for me. Especially and the end of the movie, with his dialogue with 'the other black man', I wanted to turn my computer off.

• All other actors were stereotypes, so all jokes made by them or about them could be seen from miles. 'Hot clothing-designer wife has no time for kids and realizes she could be a better mom during the movie', 'ignorant hot mom comes to realizes that she should let her husband suck on her **** instead of her almost adolescent son', and 'pregnant working mom should pay more attention to her almost-turned-gay husband'. In my opinion, a great misuse of some great hot actors.

I can continue my review with maybe 30 more of these point, but I guess everybody who reads this gets my point. I felt so disappointed after seeing this movie, I just had to write this. With such a promising cast...it just felt like the five leads had a great time making this movie with each other and had a lot of inside jokes to share. Too bad viewers were not invited, so most of these jokes were just bad...just bad.

After seeing The Expendables with some friends, my girlfriend wanted to see this one last night (I know, I know, but she's worth it OK?). I thought Kutcher is OK and so is Selleck, so let's give it a chance.

Within 10 minutes, after the introduction of the main characters (Kutcher and Heigl), the viewer get's an idea of what the rest of the movie will bring. Mercenary want's a normal life, Goodgirl has a normal life, Mercenary falls in love with Goodgirl and visa versa, they get married and it's all good. Of course not, we are not even half way through the movie.

My problem with the first part of the movie is that it's very slow. After a few minutes we all get what's going on, so let's move to the point that Kutcher must reveal the truth about his past to Goodgirl Heigl. That does not happen, but what does happen does not really improve the storyline.

The second half of this movie was quite entertaining, not all of it, but most parts. The case is that Kutcher has a 20 million bounty on his head, and everybody in the neighborhood wants him dead. Some fun action scenes are the result.

So try not to fall asleep the first part of the movie, and there will be a small reward for you in the second half. Why i'm rating this movie only 5 stars?

• Kutcher is a lot, but he is no bad ass mercenary who likes to kick and kill people - Heigl is OK, but some very irritating scenes ruined her performance for me (for instance, the car chase screaming everyone deaf part made me wanna throw my drink to my mac...eh the theater screen) - Very very very weak performance by Heigl's obese best friend (don't know her name, and don't wanna know her name) (who eats during the whole movie) who only has a few lines but they are so, so bad. - Heigl's mom has absolutely no added value in this movie. Se doesn't say a word, drinks in every scene (and no explanation is given, not even a joke) and is not at all surprised about her daughter holding a gun.

I know, I know, these are details which normally should not outweigh a fun semi-romantic, semi-action story. Too bad these details bothered me so much during the movie, frequently my thoughts drifted to some great Expendables action scenes and dialogues (haha)

This is my first review on IMDb. I normally read IMDb movie reviews with great interest, but for this movie I felt that I needed to wright one myself. Although this review contains spoilers and is intended for people who already saw this movie, for those of you who haven't seen this one yet, you might consider reading some of the more critical reviews like this one before making your decision.

I'm a fan of most historical adventure/action movies, and I've seen quite a few. This one tries to be different, but not in a good way. Some things bothered my and did not make sense to me at all, and i'd like to share some of them with you.

First, the action scenes really show the influence of director Neil Marshall (The Descent) with way too much blood and gore relative to the story. I know it might be realistic for battles these days, but it doesn't really add anything to the story.

Second, some plot developments really doesn't make any sense. The first scene in which the Romans are attacked by the Picts, why the hell do they leave Quintus Dias (Fassbender) alive? Because he speaks their language? It did not and does not make sense to me at all.

Third, the introduction of Etain (Kurylenko) is way too short. Who is she? Why is she in the Roman camp? Why can we trust her? We don't know, although the more intelligent viewer might conclude after one minute screen time that she might betray our Roman friends. Surprise! She does...

Fourth, it might be a minor bug but it sure is one for me! When the small group of Romans is attacked by the Picts after being chased 90% of the movie (see next point), they kill the junior scout (don't know actors name) with a spear through his mouth. Then they decapitate him, following the orders of Gorlacon who demanded the heads of our Roman friends after one of them killed his son. While the junior scout is decapitated, Brick is shot in the leg with an arrow. Instead of killing and decapitating him (which would make sense!!) one of the Picts says: ''let him bleed to death''. What the *****. You chase these guys for miles and hours, finally catch them and...one arrow in the leg and bleeding to death is suddenly good enough???

Fifht, the biggest fail in this movie for me is actually the whole plot. Why, after a small war against the Picts which the Picts won by killing a thousand Romans and capturing the general, would you think, would you assume, that a battered group of Romans can infiltrate the Pict camp and release the general. OK, something to do with loyalty, whatever. So they go to the camp, somehow manage to get to the general which, in theory, is impossible, but they can't release him??? OK, must have been some very well constructed metal chain. So they decide to go back (Picts are coming back to camp) but not before one of them kills Gorlacons son. This results in Gorlacon wanting the heads of these Romans. That's not good, not only for the Romans but for the viewers as well. Why? Because the movie transforms into one big chase (of which you know the outcome already at the beginning) in which Etain is some supernatural creature who can track people down in area's of hundreds of square miles. Whatever...After this boring as hell part, the most misplaced subplot I've seen in a long time makes this movie even weaker. One beautiful woman, who happens to live on her own, falls in love with our brave protagonist. Why does she live there? Who is she? Why isn't she dead? Why do these scenes take so ******* long?? And the big question: will our brave Roman see her again (seriously? I mean....oh common!!!!)

So, these things really ruined this movie for me. A weak movie, which tries to be something it fails to be. I hope people who read this review might agree with some elements in my review (although I respect everyones opinion, even the ones who make this movie an oscarwinner). And I specifically hope that those of you who did not see this movie yet, choose a different one. This one will bore you, makes you frustrated and finally makes you bored again.