Change Your Image
bemyzeke
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
The Quiet American (1958)
Biased modification of original work
I do not usually review movies, but I am forced to review it after watching and seeing that the core message of the book was altered to suite the McCarthyists sentiment of the time.
It seems disingenuous that producers would choose to make movie of a book which criticized meddling into other countries affairs in the name of democracy, but will alter the final message to suite American patriotic emotions.
At a technical level, the movie is well made, but it is infuriating to see one of the most important iconic books of its time, butchered. It is like making a movie on the book 1984, and in the end showing that Winston was really hallucinating and that Big Brother was really right.
One for the Money (2012)
Bad direction
I have read several of Evanovich's books featuring Stephanie Plum. I mostly enjoy the series and I think "One for the money" is one of the best (after all this is the book that launched the series).
The screenplay was somewhat modified from the original, apparently to adapt for movie. I have no problem with modifications as movies are a different medium.
However the movie is very poorly executed and directed. It features poor casting, acting, lighting, cinematography, and musical score. Even the locations could have been better.
Let us start with the casting. The main character in the book is attractive, but is no princess. The main characters all hail from lower middle class and have a certain street smart and resilience to help them survive. The characters in the movie, specially the lead actor, are uninteresting and unreal. Because of this the tensions between characters never materialize in the way that made the book a success.
One for the Money, the book, is a good mystery. Unfortunately, the director director never took the pains to build scenes which are suspenseful and keep viewers on edge. The lighting is flat throughout, even in the dim parking lots. Musical scores sounds like it came from a romance drama. Some of the scenes which could have been very suspenseful or scary, roll through as if nothing out of ordinary is happening.
Actors faces and body language remain mostly plain and emotionless, and their voices do not reflect the demands of the scene.
All in all, a very poorly produced movie and a big disappointment.
Gravity (2013)
One of the best sci-fi movies of modern times.
(Spoiler alert. read at your own risk)
OK, I liked the movie but was not really going to write a review until I started reading the bad reviews here criticizing the movie for being unreal. This movie is good for its great visuals, non-stop action, and a battle for survival of one person. This is a thriller set in space. No sci-fi is ever accurate, but in this case, some self-proclaimed space experts are criticizing the movie without merit. I will try to address some of the criticism below.
1. NASA would never send an astronaut with so much emotional baggage.
In reality, having a child die at the age of four does not automatically disqualify an astronaut. Psychological evaluation goes way much deeper than that. So, if all else appears normal, it is quite possible that someone with a tragic family history may make it into program. The emotions displayed by Sandra Bullock's character in space were under extreme hardship and loss of hope. It may not happen to a real astronaut but prospect of a certain, slow death, can break a very strong person.
2. Sandra's character did not decompress when Ryan opened the hatch.
She was hallucinating dude, that is why!
3. The debris stayed in orbit instead of falling to earth and burning out.
Although the movie depicts debris of epic proportions, but whatever debris there is, is likely to stay in the orbit at least for some time (depending on the velocity and distance from earth). The movie implies that all satellites are on the same orbit and therefore on a collision path. This is incorrect, but it is possible that when satellites are hit that they get knocked into a different orbit putting them on collision course with other satellites.
4. Chinese entry vehicle caught fire upon entry and yet did not burn out.
Entry vehicles can heat to several thousand degree and are designed to withstand the temperature.
5. Sandra's character was able to swim after returning from space.
Actually, swimming will come more naturally to someone returning from zero gravity, because it is a low gravity environment. However walking on earth just a few minutes after landing was unreal (and inconsequential to the story).
6. Eenie meanie Minnie mo. What? Really!
Shenzhou capsule is supposed to be a replica of Soyuz. Since Sandra's character had some knowledge of Soyuz controls, she was using her imagination to press the same buttons. Also, at this point, the character was taking chances without much hope.
This is not to say that this movie did not take artistic license and did not exaggerate, but it was a drama not a documentary. I have yet to see a sci-fi which is believable. Don't compare it with Apollo 13. That was true story, not a sci-fi.
On the whole, this is a very well executed thriller. It is not a very good drama though. Writers tried to add some "emotional" spice to the characters (perhaps in hope of an Oscar), but it did not work that well, perhaps because there was no time to build characters.
Spring Breakers (2012)
and now for something different
If you watch this movie in the hope of watching some nudity, you will be rewarded modestly but the pain of watching will overwhelm that reward.
However if you keep an open mind, know the director and main actors, and look for an intelligent flick beautifully shot, you will be amply rewarded (and nudity will come as a bonus!).
This movie combines petty desires, ambitions, drive, pragmatism, and ruthlessness; all around the lives of few simple girls. You have to get over the fact that there is plenty of nudity (by US standards) but it is not the point. The movie is not erotic, not a teen flick, not a thriller, nor a crime drama (ok, maybe little of the last one).
I am not going to go in the plot much; as there is not much of it. You could summarize the whole thing in a paragraph. However it is the presentation, the microscopic look in the lives of main characters, their faults (mostly) and strength that it is engaging and rewarding.
As I said at the beginning, keep an open mind, don't have any preconceived notions, and prepare to be taken through a visual (and somewhat surreal) journey.
Melancholia (2011)
What is the point?
I mean there is some good imagery, some good acting, and other pieces of brilliance in there. But do they combine to make a movie? No, not really.
There are two parts of this movie. Each is unrelated to the other in terms of plot line. The movie is marketed as a doomsday scenario pending over a difficult wedding. In fact wedding has nothing to do with doomsday and is over long before.
This is not a sci-fi action or thriller movie where I can just put my brain on the side and enjoy action or special effects. But this is not even a human drama where I can identify with the characters and sympathize with them. The scientific plot is unrealistic, the characters behavior is unrealistic, and (as it turns out) my expectations from this movie were unrealistic. I give it full solid four stars.
One side note: Even though the movie promotes Kristen Dunst as the leading actor, her character (Justine) really appears to be only supporting Charlotte Gainsbourg (Claire).
Get Smart (2008)
No comedy, No thrill, little action
Steve Carrell (though I love his role in "The Office") is no Steve Martin (or Peter Sellers or Jerry Lewis, etc..). He is not natural to physical comedy. A movie that relies heavily on physical comedy, should have chosen a different actor.
A so-so writing with so-so acting makes for a very boring movie. The movie is full of clichés, there are few laughs (if any), no suspense, no thrill, and little action. The only reason to see this movie would be if you loved the Get Smart TV show and feel nostalgic about it.
Steve Carrels stars as an intelligence analysts, turned field agent who has found some terrorist "chatter" and goes on after the terrorists as a companion to Anne Hathaways's character Agent 99. Anne Hathaway stars as the seasoned Agent 99. Anne is good looking and acts well, but I don't think she comes out as "tough".
Hathaway's looks, and Carrell's goofs, are what the director's saw as selling point and probably fired the script writers. Even though Hathaway looks good, unfortunately (for the viewer) Steve Carrell's goofs are well below average.
There is not much to say about the plot twists, because there aren't any. I am surprised that some reviewers added spoiler alert to their reviews. There is nothing to spoil the suspense. Five minutes into the movie, you can predict what will happen (and it WILL happen). I even recognized the voice of the terrorist leader the first time I heard it even though it was muffled (bad sound technician?).
Summary:
Good: Musical Score, Some Sets, Some Choreography, and some Cinematography
Bad: everything else