Reviews

5 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
2/10
disappointed
19 July 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Disappointment.

Let me start by saying "Monsters Inc." was one of my favourite movies when I was younger and still stands in my top three Pixar films with "The Incredibles" and "A Bug's Life" ('COUGH' Seven Samurai 'COUGH'). So I went into this film with high expectations. I don't know why. I should'v known what to expect from a university based prequel.

Where "Monsters Inc." succeeded was where most Pixar films succeed, it's originality. "Monsters Inc." is one of the most original ideas ever conceived, a story centerd around monsters in an alternate monster universe that travel through closet door portals to the human world to scare children to generate energy for their world. It doesn't get much more original then that. And the originality stopped dead there, because the last thing this prequel has is originality.

For starters there were barely any new characters... I should rephrase, no new characters worth remembering or caring about. The only main new characters added were complete stereotypical university centred characters, the geeks and the jocks, and in their most generic forms. Oh and don't forget the overly strict administrator who (Surprise, Surprise) shows caring by the end of the film having a change of heart and doesn't seem so mean after all. And of course the stereotypical dumb/naive, easily excitable mother figure.

The most promising thing about this movie was seeing the transition for Randal. When he came into the movie (not really a spoiler he's in the trailer and it's in the first ten minutes) he's nice, so I was excited to see his transition to becoming the villain we see him as in "Monsters Inc." and let me tell you (possible spoiler ahead, jump to next paragraph if you want absolutely nothing spoiled) it was vastly disappointing. It was literally two scenes: one where he just outwardly tells Mike he wants to be popular so he can't hang with him anymore. And the next is he's in the opposing team in a competition against Mike and Sully and loses and then says "that's the last time I lose to you, Sullivan" I was heart-brokenly disappointed at this. To me it actually belittled Randal as a villain in the original because suddenly he just didn't seem that evil anymore now knowing that it all stemmed from him losing once against Sully in University and wanting to be popular. They at least could'v developed it further...more than two scenes at least.

The rest of the movie was just countless predictable plot points. It's the age old university centred movie story of rival houses having a competition (Screw it there's going to be spoilers, I'm angry and ready to rant) and of course Mike and Sully start off not being friends and what'ya know it they become friends because, common, I know you know this one... Yeahp, that's right! They discover they have to work together to succeed at things instead of trying to do it on their own and it brings them together...because we haven't seen that in a dozen Disney movies already. AND THAT'S IT! There's literally nothing more than that. The first movie was so groundbreaking and had such amazing scale and then they just took those characters, put them in university, and told a story we'v all heard plenty of times before.

It wasn't even that funny. I can remember laughing out loud once: a slug monster is late for class and starts trying to run but he just goes really slow and they pull the whole "Family Guy" joke goes on longer than expected and I admittedly laughed quite long and loud. But that's it. The rest I could recognize it was supposed to be funny but it just didn't work for me. I was probably just too disappointed to laugh.

The one redeeming thing about this movie (ULTIMATE SPOILER) is at the end they get expelled, which I didn't expect. It shows in a montage that they found their own way to work at Monsters Inc. showing that university isn't necessarily the only option, which I think is a good message to send to the young people of today (considering most are brainwashed the opposite).

But that was it. The rest of the movie was just constantly predictable and disappointing. They had such great material to work with and it's like they didn't even try. I felt like I was watching a Disney channel show that was a spin off of one of their well known movies, or like a made for TV movie. It was the equivalent of Shrek's Christmas special...only I expect something like that from Dreamworks after seeing Shrek 2...and 3...and 4. Pixar is the last group of people I would call unimaginative, and yet here I am. They should'v left it at the original if they weren't willing to do something fresh with it. I think Pixar should stick to original films and stay away from sequels/prequels. Yes, they struck gold with Toy Story 3 apparently (I'm the only person who hasn't seen it yet), but that doesn't mean everything else needs a sequel...and yes "Plains" counts as a sequel to "Cars", I don't care what you say. Actually I wouldn't mind a sequel to "The Incredibles"...okay, if you're going to make a sequel make sure it's WORTH making and you're not just making a sequel for the sake of making it with no real original exciting story to tell. I expect other movies to make sequels without putting too much thought into if they're worth making, because they know people will see them and they'll make money. But not Pixar, they were the last production company I'd expect to do that. A sequel/prequel should be able to stand on it's own, this prequel barely stands on the shoulders of the original, it wobbles at best.

I'm just so...

Disappointed.
29 out of 47 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Shame (2011)
7/10
Fassbender & McQueen rise above
19 July 2013
I saw this film for two reasons: Michael Fassbender, and Steve McQueen. So I'll start my review with them.

Michael Fassbender- A towering performance, completely expected. Fassbender is a master of depth and range and is one of the best actors working today. Every role he submerges himself in is vastly different from the last, from his role in Tarantino's "Inglourious Basterds" to his portrayal of Magneto in "X-Men: First Class", few could fill the shoes (or should I say helmet) of the great Ian McKellen. The case is no different here. For an hour and forty minutes we completely believe Fassbender as a sex addict riddled with shame and regret. I can see why McQueen has decided to use Fassbender in his films so frequently, few actors can generate such gravity. Fassbender goes to dark and humiliating places and tugs us every inch of the way. One of his best performances and one of the best performances of the year (he was robbed of a best actor nomination).

Steve McQueen- A fantastic introduction to this master director, however, I have unfair mixed feelings. Starting with the good, McQueen is a true art film director; every shot could've been a painting. He brought beauty onto tragic subject matter. As dark as the film got, McQueen's visuals stayed consistently entrancing. That being said, I went into this film having heard numerous reviews of McQueen jarring the audience with shocking visuals, going further and deeper than other directors would dare to go. Frankly, not once did I find McQueen making me feel uncomfortable, shocked, or bothered in any way. Like I said I found quite the opposite, I found he brought beauty. Rather than creating a sense of anxiety I felt he brought simple understanding. Don't get me wrong, he dealt with every scene with truth and honesty, and he was certainly compelling, but not uncomfortably compelling in the way I was expecting from hearing other reviews. He was no Scorsese, or Fincher, or Darren Aronofsky. Clearly people who found this film hard to watch never saw "Taxi Driver" or "Requiem for a Dream". However, this doesn't discredit McQueen at all. What he has in common with these filmmakers was his ability to tackle dark subject matter and find the truth in it and bring it out in an honest way, stylistically is where they differ. Where my mixed feelings come in is that, unfairly to McQueen, I went into the film with expectations of him to deal with the subject matter in a stylistic way more similar to Scorsese, Fincher, or Aronofsky. I was ready to be taken on a roller coaster, and what I got was a ferris wheel: excellent visuals, but not as much thrill. That being said, I was highly impressed with McQueen as a director and having seen this film makes me want to see "Hunger" and heightens my anticipation for "12 years a Slave". He is a true visionary and a talent to watch in the coming years.

Carey Mulligan- Everyone seems to love this actress. When I think of Mulligan two other actresses come to mind, Michelle Williams and Hermione...I mean Emma Watson (don't know why). Unfortunately for Mulligan she is my least favourite of these three; where she differs from them is her range. Unlike Fassbender I find Mulligan has little range, or at least hasn't gotten the chance to show it. I loved her in "Drive" as the troubled girl, living a troubled life, surrounded by troubled people...then I saw her play that role again in 'The Great Gatsby" and now again here. I'm not saying these characters are all exactly the same, I'm saying I found she played them all too similar for my liking. I'd say the only performance I've seen her do which isn't completely similar to these is her performance in "An Education"...but I didn't particularly enjoy her performance in that... and it still had that troubled reminisce she mirrors in these other roles. So although I wouldn't call her a bad actress, I will say that she didn't wow me in this, and I just found I was watching Carey Mulligan instead of her character, because I've seen her play this role two times too many. Where Fassbender brought me in, she brought me out.

The Script- Written by Abi Morgan and Steve McQueen I thought the dialogue was fantastically natural and the dynamics of the characters were well developed. The story, however, failed to impress me and I would even say almost reached disappointment. I just couldn't help but feel I've seen this story before, it was far too predictable. I found myself waiting for things to happen...and then they did. I had far higher hopes and I really wanted something fresh and new, but this film didn't give me that. The story didn't stick with me once the end credits hit. I just felt like I saw another tragic character study that I've seen ten times before. This is where the film lost its stars most for me.

What did stick with me and what saved this film was exactly what I went into it for, Fassbender and McQueen. Fassbender took a traditional flawed character and made him compelling, at times overwhelmingly. McQueen took a cookie-cutter story and added style and mesmerizing visuals. They make this film worth watching. To read the script I probably would've struggled to keep my eyes open and read on; To watch the film I would've had to struggle to look away.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Inception (2010)
10/10
It's Inception
16 July 2010
Inception is the most well crafted, thought out, mind blowing masterpiece I've ever experienced. By saying this I am not saying it is my favourite movie although it has great potential of being so after a few more viewings; but it is the greatest movie I've ever seen because of how perfect it is in every aspect of what it is. Christopher Nolan creates a world and a story within that world that is so perfected in every way that it makes you sit there and believe in what your watching, that's how emerged you become in this picture. But I would actually rather classify it as something other then a film for no other film has made me feel or think this way afterwords. You sit in awe, and as the screen goes black your overwhelmed by what you've just sat through.

I can't stop thinking about it! It's completely consumed me and I'm totally thrown away by what I have just watched. Christopher Nolan has created art with this Film. It will force you to watch it again and again just to understand everything you just went through. I feel like I haven't finished watching it and haven't completed my Inception experience till I watch it at least two more times...it's breathtaking, thought provoking and I feel like I haven't left the theatre because the movie wont get out of my head! There's no describing it, it's simply Inception.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Kick-Ass (2010)
9/10
Kick Ass is Bad Ass
23 April 2010
Anyone who has ever wished to be a superhero, pretended to fly, super punch, turn invisible or just plain kick some ass but knew you never could...here's the movie for you!

Although deserving it's 18A R rating, this movie will blow your mind with awesomeness, yes thats right AWESOMENESS. The main character Kick-Ass is both comedic, quirky, and relatable (weather to yourself or someone you know) to anyone who's ever been to high school. His friends, also comedic, also will remind any guy of their own little group of three musketeers talking about movies, sports, comics and of coarse girls. The other heroes, such as Hit-Girl (who alone could provides the R rating) and Big-Daddy act as a total sub plot to the film that eventually mashes together with Kick-ass's story. They provide the majority of the REAL ASS KICKING. Also the characters actually get so connected with you that by the end you will actually feel and sympathize with the obstacles and tragedies they have to go through. Despite all the blood and violence there are some touching moments in this film.

In all, this movie rocked, it's not for kids, it'll blow your mind, the filming technique was great props to the director, the acting was good, the action was sweet, and the movie in total kicked some SERIOUS ASS!!!
214 out of 329 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Predictable, yet Scorsese
23 February 2010
I am an extreme movie goer. So obviously I follow the works of the great Martin Scorsese. I heard this movie was also a thinker and much like an old style Hitchcock film. Considering Hitchcock is my favourite director and is a master at his work and a genius at the art of psychological horror...I was overwhelmed with excitement for this movie.

In all I say the plot of this movie was...okay. Don't get me wrong, it's very smart and completely original and as far as I know not done before. However, if you are as much a movie buff as myself this twist ending is a give away obvious one right off the bat. this is why it lost 3 stars for me. However, it touches on many emotions and other aspects besides the main plot of the film and runs deeper then its first visible roots. A truly complex film.

Now on too why I gave it the seven stars. Martin Scorsese, Martin Scorsese, Martin Scorsese. If for no other reason, see this film for its amazing directing. Shutter Island truly brings back the psychological thriller and is both beautifully and horrifyingly directed. This right here is why Scorsese is known for being a true dominator of his medium.

And so for Performance of the movie by both the actors and director I give this movie a probable 9.5 but for plot and story I give it a probable 6. I recommend it, but for those real film buffs out there who know the layout of how movies work and are good at guessing the twist endings...don't get your hopes up. However 45% of the people I went with said they didn't understand it so I guess that can be taken into account as well.
11 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed