Change Your Image
csmottram
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Interstellar (2014)
Bloody Awful... Space has never been so dull...
I went in with low expectations... but nothing can prepare you for such a dreadfully uninspiring, convoluted, ass numbing experience. Matthew McConaughey is totally miscast..hardly audible at times..terrible southern droll. There is so much crying in this film, he cries, his daughter cries, the scientist cries, the (insert) villain cries. This film treats dangerous black holes like an elevator journey..their dangerous magnitude and awe is lost and ignored in a few short scenes. The colour pallet for this film is washed out greys, dull and lifeless. The 2 planets they visit are so badly realised and uninteresting you can hear several astronomers and physicists weeping in their homes and hanging up their lab coats.
Christopher Nolan is on a mission to devolve the human race with total nonsense. Its just awful, another space film ruined by a weird crazy 'space odyssey' ending..to be honest the film lost me long before that. The robot is terrible..like something clunked together from Lego by a 4 year old. Every scene with it in made the audience cringe or laugh. 165 million dollar film with some of the worst effects I've seen on the big screen in years. The camera angles were baffling, especially following the shuttles in and out of orbit. They were filmed so close..it was like the director knew they were s@@t and said "its OK guys...I'll pan to a member of the crew crying". I didn't care about any of the characters....Nolan is just awful at conveying human relationships, awful script writer with his brother...nepotism at its finest. Im still recovering..shocked..I'm done with Nolan...the dark knight rises was awful, inception was awful..this is just the icing on the cake...this should have been a space exploration film... wowing the hard paying audience with its gripping story and dazzling effects...in the end it's just total tosh...lifeless, boring and self indulgent.
Godzilla (2014)
the arrogance of man is thinking this is a good film...
Wow... Where to begin...
Firstly I loved Gareth Edwards first film Monsters, it had a subtle charm to it... I was interested in seeing what he was capable of doing with a bigger budget. The trailers for Godzilla were captivating and suitably enigmatic.
OK.. Godzilla...
Firstly the script is really really bad with clunky dialogue and bad actors. The bloke from breaking bad, who in the trailers was focused on as the main protagonist..*spoiler alert...dies very early on in the film. I was sat there thinking wtf? It caught me totally off guard. The Japanese guy ken wanatabe or whatever his name is spent the entire film looking miserable and constipated..maybe he was! He was just miserable and confused, very poor direction. His assistant, some actress, wouldn't have got an acting job in a British panto never mind a tentpole summer film. She was so mellow dramatic and awkward. The kick ass guy was OK, better than Taylor kitsch anyway. His wife was awful, out of her depth..she also looked at the camera a couple of times. This is quite worrying as the pair are soon to play sister and brother in avengers 2.
The film jumps around a lot, hundreds of miles of land and ocean are covered in minutes. As stated in other reviews, the film is a very slow burner. You only really see Godzilla later in the film. The monsters and the fights are done far better in pacific rim. I know pacific rim had some awful dialogue, but it also had humour and the fights were engaging. Poor Godzilla with his elephant feet, really I wasn't bothered or pulled into the fight sequences. The film ended abruptly. I was laughing, the cinema audience stood up and looked puzzled at each other.
The 5 points I gave this film, its only saving grace, were for the sets and effects which I thought were excellent. I liked some of Gareth Edwards shots and the way he at least holds the camera steady, but the film isn't good. Some people hated Roland Emmerichs Godzilla, I haven't watched it for years, this film is almost as bad. Sorry, if your a fanboy, you may enjoy it, but anyone else... Its just meh..an OK'ish film.
Storage 24 (2012)
Noisy Inept Characters,Charmless sub par SCI FI Film
Watch "Aliens" if you want an Alien film, or "Feast"/"Slither" if you like gory mutilation monster horror.
I normally like Clarke as an actor but this was a tough film to finish. Even low budget films can be filmed to make them look like they have higher production values. These characters stand around when people die, they stand around and chat, they stand around and die. No urgency. The two males leads squabble as an ET stalks them, even some of the music has homages to James Horners Aliens score. There are also vents for the hero's to crawl through.
The alien is a guy on stilts, but most of the time the alien is in extreme close up. It has a mandible mouth like the predator. It was just bad. Even "Attack of the Block" was more enjoyable, at least that knew it was silly and played on the dark humour.
Pretty boring film, and Clarke should have known better.. Get the story right, get the characters right, add tension and horror. The ending reminded me of the Alien film "Altered", which by the way is much better.
Avoid film or catch it on the SCI-FI Channel
Skyfall (2012)
007 is back, but is it the real James Bond? (And why is the Joker in this?)
I've just finished a marathon of Bond films over the last 2 weeks in preparation for Bond 23.
I've just watched all of Connery's Bond, all of Moore's Bond, I skipped Dalton's Bond, the Australian Bond and watched bits of Bronson's Bond. So I was now ready for the new bond... nearly ready. I watched the great Casino Royale and fell asleep watching Quantum.
Now I was Ready!! And wow...what a strange film this is...
Obviously I wasn't expecting the campness of the early films but I was expecting a Bond Thrill Ride. So I waited and watched, and waited some more...
Great opening, some intrigue, a nice bond girl....I looked at my watch, thinking something massive is building...it surely must be...wow, I didn't realise the joker was in this??? What!!!! And this is were the film started to disappoint. I disliked the villain in this film, an odd camp bisexual misfit with a lob sided face when he removes his fake teeth. He also comes with a blonde wig to rival Elton John, tech wizardry and enough foresight to rival Uri Geller (Google him). The plot seemed to fall to bits upon his entry into the movie, i.e the hard drive, where did it go? who has it? Surely getting this back was more important? I enjoyed the likes of Goldfinger, Blofeld, I even enjoyed the voodoo priest in Live and let die, and Christopher Lees Scaramanga. They were products of their time and fun. This guy grated me, he didn't seem to fit into the modern take on Bond. Anyway enough of him.
This film has some nice cinematography and locations, but most of the film is a drama and lacked the degree of tension to carry the quiet parts. Because the villain takes over the 2nd half of the film, it all became a bit silly. The whole protecting M by hiding her in the Scottish Highlands, without support, suspend your belief at this point. She was after all the leader of MI 6 and someone of high importance. Bond fails to protect her, so the whole Skyfall estate was a complete waste of time. Not sure what Bond was thinking taking her there, and at the same time leaving a trail of breadcrumbs. This was before seeing what assets he had available prior to the baddie and his goons arriving. Which apparently turns out to be a severally aged Albert Finney, who seemed to struggle with his lines.
The cinematography is very good, even the dark scenes, and the use of light and lighting was excellent. Using flames to light scenes during the final confrontation was a nice touch. The underwater fight scene was nicely lit.
So on to the actors... Daniel Craig was fine, but Bond was worn out and tired, he seemed to lack conviction. A complete contrast to other Bond films. Judy Dench, fine actress, cant complain. Javier Bardem, too weird, not in a good way. Even Christopher Walken was a better villain. Naomie Harris, not good, seemed miscast, which is worrying since it appears she'll be appearing in future films. Bond girl Bérénice Marlohe didn't last more than 10 minutes, which was a mistake, since she was quite interesting. A poor choice to kill her off quick. Q was in it too, but not really fleshed out.
Mendes has taken the Casino Royale and stripped Bond of his urgency. He has reduced Bond to a drama, and taken lots of the fun and energy out. He's tried to pay homage to the old Bonds by introducing a new male M, Q, and Moneypenny, and reintroducing the Aston Martin db5 complete with guns (I did have a sly smile on my face at this scene). The direction of the film is fine, but the story was lacklustre, and had too much drama. Not a terrible film by any means but several pieces essential to Bond seemed to be missing.
At this point it seems Casino Royale is Daniel Craigs Goldfinger. Will it ever be topped? Maybe not.
The Dark Knight Rises (2012)
Worse than Prometheus...seriously
I can't believe this is the same director...
I thoroughly enjoyed the 2 previous films but this was a CrapFest.
I found myself asking questions throughout the film, which is a disjointed, boring, batless flick...when he does show up, it's not very interesting...the bat, I'm afraid, has lost his touch...
Ingredients for DARK KNIGHT RISES POOP MILKSHAKE>>
1) Swap Wayne Water Device from the first film with a Wayne energy Atom bomb, thats pretty much the story, even with its own timer..also include explosive drains. 2) Add 2+ hours of dull exposition with 20 min of bland/repetitive action scenes. 3) Add the pointless character of Gordon Levitt, {correction}.. replace Batman/Bruce Wayne screen time with Gordon Levitt. Nolan has sold the fans short by catering to the next film in the Bat series by giving this character too much screen time. The character knows who batman is too quick and the audience is asked to make a leap of faith and just go with it.....WTF...Seriously...WTF...some sob story about seeing Bruce at an orphanage...and knowing its batman..blah blah 4) Convolute the story even more by adding in more uninteresting characters, and a last minute villain...that you could see a mile away. 5) Add the compulsory Scarecrow character into the film through a bizarre court scene. 6) Have enemies that can't shoot fully automatic weapons in a straight line. 7) Force in the "Bane breaks Bat storyline", then unconvincingly have Gotham under siege for 5 months. 8) Destroy Gotham Bridges or have scenes involving the Gotham Bridges. 9) Add overwhelming music to try and recover/improve bad scenes. 10) Fail to capitalise on a great baddie in Bane and a great actor in Tom Hardy by one shoting him at the end...cheap O' so Cheap... 11) Have a plot involving cops being trapped underground for 5 months...I call them Mole-cops, thats trademarked! 12) Have an atom explosion scene in the end that rivals Indiana and the poop skull. 13) Have Gotham cheering (even as the radiation cloud is blown towards Gotham).
I could continue... but I'm so underwhelmed, I have to try and remember to breath.
Prometheus (2012)
Prometheus...Is it good to ask Questions?
Prometheus... a bold idea... but ultimately a very uneven film. It was filmed as a companion piece to the Alien Franchise rather than a direct sequel or prequel; instead opting to ask the question 'Where did it all start?' It was a risky strategy but one worth taking since the Alien films had lost their way since the second film 'Aliens'.
SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS!!! I may moan a bit, but honestly I didn't hate the film... I had issues with some of it.
Get it together team!!
In the previous Alien films (not 4), they had great first acts. You get to meet the characters, you get to see them interact and it all seems natural. Prometheus started off well with David (Android), going about his daily activities whilst the crew slept. This reminded me of Moon (Dir. Duncan Jones). Once the crew are awake though, the characters were pretty dire. With the exception of Noomi's character, all the others seemed uninterested or unaware of the magnitude of their mission - even ungrateful. An example - You have a Geologist who looks like he belongs in a Ska band. He seemed completely uninterested in all the alien rocks around him, and whose only purpose is to throw some light balls around and moan. Then you have other characters that are just there to die with zero development. Alien/Aliens had developed characters! This film didn't. I couldn't care if they lived or not, even when the captain sacrifices the ship. Charlize Therons character was pointless, and woefully under developed. She seemed to have been included just to add another female to the cast.
What about our synthetic friend...
Ah David...David the Android did random things throughout the film that made no sense. In one scene he mentioned that he is programmed to do whatever Weyland needs him to do, but some of it was odd. He was constantly touching things, activating things, infecting people, and was a liability. Surely there would have been protocols for him? This leads me on to the fact that none of the scientists took any precautions, were not very bright and seemed oblivious to what was going on. A big example was when Noomi's character escaped to perform self surgery, afterwards she just returns and nobody says anything. They didn't quarantine her, ask her were her Satan spawn was, or see if she wanted help with her staples. The whole scene was a bit crazy. Guy Pearce played Weyland, but really an older actor should have been used.... this isn't middle earth with hobbits.
So what was it all about...?
The story was interesting and it definitely gets you thinking long after you've seen the film. There was a lot crammed into the film; maybe this is where the film falls down. The film should have been 30 minutes longer to sort out the pacing issues. I would have liked to have seen more exploration of the alien tunnels and corridors. It felt like there were 2 sets in the film, Prometheus and the big room with the stone head in it. The scientists should have setup a base camp in the Alien Caverns like proper scientists and done proper scientific research i.e. not injecting stuff into alien skulls without taking measurements etc (face palm). The film showed tantalising snippets of the planets incredible terrain.
Engineers or Space Jockeys... Eng-jockey!
There are more questions than answers regarding these beings. The opening scene suggests one of them spawned the modern human race deliberately/not deliberately (the flying ship was different to the derelict seen later on in the film). Later in the film it's surmised, by none other than the captain, that the eng-jockeys are malevolent and want to wipe the human race out...which is confirmed when bodies start piling up. He's smarter than the scientists! The alien engineers look impressive, but with all the questions the film poses Ridley may well have lost some of his audience by being too vague. He is after all 74 and no spring chicken anymore so who knows if he'll ever get around to making a sequel to this....and it sorely needs a sequel.
There's a religious undertone throughout the film, and the general theme of wanting to meet your maker without stopping first to ask the question whether it's a good idea or not (didn't they do that in Star Trek V?).
Are they real Mountains...Can that ship really fly?
The effects were outstanding – planets, ships, set designs etc. I watched it in 3D at an IMAX Theatre. The 3D wasn't invasive. My eyes didn't hurt; I didn't have to take my glasses off part way through. However, I wish the build up to the landing had been as intense as the Nostromo landing in the first film. It all seemed a bit easy and quick. If Ridley releases a Director's cut (a 100% guarantee from his conversations), he needs to sort out the pacing. There was quite a bit of jumping from scene to scene, set to set.
So...Is this an Alien Film or not?
The answer is yes, and no. The answer is no right up until the last few minutes, and then it's a big yes at the end. Very much the way Abrams Star Trek revitalised that franchise, this could well do the same for the Alien universe. However, this is not a TV show like Lost, and I don't want the next film to ask questions without answers. Let's see what happens....anyway....This is Csmottram, last surviving member of IMDb, signing off...
Battleship (2012)
Battleship..something
I went watching this film with the hope it would be similar to the first Transformers Film (big budget/ same company). However, halfway through the film I was looking at my watch with boredom. Anyway, I'll start from what I remember... EXTREME SPOILERS "Guy steals food for girl, gets arrested, coerced into joining the navy by brother (who is in the navy too), continues to fail as an officer but shows potential?, Girlfriends Dad is the senior officer for the international fleet, Guy is warned that he has no future in the navy but allowed to remain in the fleet, Fleet gets separated by force field, Guy becomes most senior officer after the first attack by Aliens, Chaos ensues". I didn't have a problem with the premise for the story about bad Aliens. However I did take an exception with the fact that an (assumingly) intelligent space-faring race should have better ways of defending themselves. Also, from a scene involving a telepathic flashback, the alien shows Taylor Kitsch a scene of destruction from the aliens past. This scene has obviously been included to insinuate that the aliens are aggressive and violent. However, I found the aliens to be incredibly tame and lame throughout this film. Firstly, the ships they used made absolutely no sense. It was like the film crew had a brain-storming session and someone said "wouldn't it be cool if they swam like dolphins...you know, in and out of the water" Really? I can just imagine the aliens overdosing on travel motion medicine to stop them filling their helmets up with puke. Can you imagine being on their ships when they surface and dive? Also the fact that the Aliens themselves used Ballistic weapons i.e. Mortar Grenades only, with a very limited firing arch was pretty weak. How effective are these against airborne targets? It was like the Aliens only had a single means to protect themselves (I'll talk about the gyro-cycles later). I'd also expect a ship that can hover to have some way of shooting targets that get under the guns (the dingy scene in the film is daft). The alien's priority on arriving at Earth was to transmit a message back home, but their communications ship was destroyed on re-entry. The most important piece of their equipment, the communication ship, the thing they needed to start the invasion of Earth was also unbelievably fragile (its hits an earth satellite and has a catastrophic failure). It makes no sense; one would assume that on their journey to Earth the Aliens would have had to navigate through Asteroid Belts, Comets, Planets, Stars, and Radiation etc. So to be undone by a piece of primitive Earth tech is lazy writing. As I said before, their mission seems to have been to scout ahead and signal their Alien friends at home to start the invasion. At every opportunity whilst walking around though, the Aliens seemed reluctant to kill their aggressors. I felt like I was watching a weak version of the Borg (not the Swedish singer, the Star Trek Baddie). Like the Borg the Aliens seemed to be oblivious to all the humans' attempts to stop them. Surely, having travelled through space/galaxies/the universe they would have thought it worthwhile to destroy any and all opposition in the force field dome they created. At least the aliens in Independence Day were suitably menacing, with their tentacles and large cranial heads. What we end up with here are humanoids with goaty beards, I kid you not (who won't kill you even though you're probably going to interfere with their mission). As commented by other people, they do look similar to the Master Chief character from Halo. I didn't mind the design of their armour but without the helmet they looked crap and too human like. The Aliens also used Gyro-cycles as weapons to basically slice through things - Including important strategic targets such as a kid's baseball pitch and a highway bridge with civilians on, before finally finding the military base. I can understand destroying the lines of communication includes transport links but the whole highway scene was rather pointless....unless
to showcase some more pointless CGI. (Footnote: Should we ever get invaded by Aliens, I really hope it's these guys). They also let the irritating nerdy scientist weakling guy get away with some tech that could stop them... at least the aliens were consistently stupid throughout the film. Red Target Bad (slap, push around) - Green Good (ignore)... OK, enough about the Aliens, now the humans. Taylor Kitschs character was a bit of a jerk and should never have been allowed to remain in the navy. Even after all the training he was still unable to behave and was made an officer for some reason. I couldn't really root for him. I was actually happy to see that tall bloke from True Blood get a part (Alexander Skarsgård) he's the best thing in this film but was underused. Rihanna was the stereotypical cool ghetto girl, who says interesting lines like "Yes Sir", and "Tonight I'ma let you be the captain". There were other people in the film including Liam Neeson but these were pretty forgettable and cheesy. Taylor Kitschs's girlfriend in the film was nothing more than eye candy with a daft subplot about him proposing to her. I kind of drifted off in the middle of the film...until
A group of Octarian Sailors decided to steal the Missouri!!! I really hate it when they do this in American films. I have nothing against commemorating old people who served their country, but not like this. There is a scene in the film were "they" just appear, spread out (or wheeled on and propped up) all over the bow/the deck/on the radar (I kid you not), then they are whizzing around the ship doing sailor stuff
even though they have a combined age of 900 years or something.
I'm done with this review; Prometheus (Ridley Scott) can't get here soon enough!!!