Pulp Fiction and Reservoir Dogs: 4 stars
From Dawn Till Dusk: 2 stars
Tarantino is a master at making great screenplays. He is tremendous at writing his own films, but when it comes to acting, he is nowhere near as good as others he surrounds himself with.
I do not recommend any of these three films, though I do give Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction four stars. They have many downfalls, but the artistry of these two films is so good that it couldn’t be less than four stars. There is too much swearing and too many drug and sexual references that just don’t appeal to my taste. Whenever the director and actors have an armory of f-bombs as big as the Grand Canyon, it doesn’t give as much depth to a film as one with a broad vocabulary.
From Dusk Till Dawn is another story entirely. For the first hour of the movie, it seemed like it was going to be pretty good, minus the acting of Quentin Tarantino, but then all of a sudden they went the supernatural route and randomly vampires came out of nowhere. Where did they come from!?! There was no warning, there was no mention or hint of the supernatural before then all of a sudden a vampire attacks them and then there are thousands. And this film is not Harvey Keitel’s (National Treasure) or George Clooney’s best performance.
Reservoir Dogs is not as bad with the crudeness as Pulp Fiction, but it isn’t as well told as Pulp Fiction either. Tim Roth (The Incredible Hulk, Planet of the Apes) did a great job, along with Harvey Keitel, but the other actors weren’t as good. There were fine moments in the film, as there is in every Tarantino. But Pulp Fiction tells the story better and has better lines and story than Dogs. Samuel L. Jackson and John Travolta steal the movie whenever they are on screen at the same time.
See it: none of these films. Maybe Pulp Fiction if you don’t mind loads of language and two sexual scenes.
Don’t see it: all of these films.
Next time: Gladiator and Kingdom of Heaven
Sunday, May 30, 2010
Monday, May 24, 2010
Robin Hood: 4 stars
Robin Hood is one of Ridley Scott’s greatest films. He adds another successful film to his resumé. This movie has great action scenes, brilliant performances, and a well told back story to the great outlaw we all know and love.
There isn’t much in terms of story, there’s only so much one can do with a story about Robin Hood, but Scott did his best in trying to find as original of a story as he could without retelling any of the old stories that we know. There are some interesting new points that Scott brings to the table. A new villain is introduced (played to perfection by the amazing Mark Strong, Sherlock Holmes), we actually see a bit of a soft spot of King John (Oscar Isaacs, The Nativity Story), and we do not see much of the Sheriff of Nottingham (Matthew MacFaydan, Pride & Prejudice, a very different role for him).
Although the acting is great, from Eleanor of Aquitaine (Eileen Atkins, Cold Mountain, Gosford Park) to Cate Blanchett as Maid Marian (The Lord of the Rings, The Aviator), the cinematography stole the show, which usually happens in a Ridley Scott film. The beautifully grand helicopter shots, the wide landscape and seascape images of the country, and the well lit sets were so vivid, it just left me in awe of how well Scott and his Director of Photography, John Mathieson, captured the lands of the film.
The greatest scene was the final battle at Dover Beach. Some have felt this to be too close to the Omaha Beach sequence in Saving Private Ryan, but it wasn’t in my opinion. The sea was a great place to fight, since most epic battles take place on large fields (Braveheart). The water splashing everywhere and the soaking foot soldiers gave more visuals to the battle. But all of the battles were good, not just that one. There is only so much one can do with a land battle, and it becomes monotonous. Also, many people feared that these battles would be too reminiscent of Kingdom of Heaven or Gladiator, but none of them were. Each battle had its own unique style and choreography. Also, it could not be paralleled with these films because there was no blood splattering all over the place, which I thought was good, because that too can get monotonous.
I highly recommend this movie. There is humor with Friar Tuck, King John, and the Merry Men. There is romance (but not too much) between Marian and Robin. As I said, there is brilliant action that many would enjoy. And the acting is also the greatest that some of these actors have done.
Next time: Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs, and From Dusk Until Dawn.
There isn’t much in terms of story, there’s only so much one can do with a story about Robin Hood, but Scott did his best in trying to find as original of a story as he could without retelling any of the old stories that we know. There are some interesting new points that Scott brings to the table. A new villain is introduced (played to perfection by the amazing Mark Strong, Sherlock Holmes), we actually see a bit of a soft spot of King John (Oscar Isaacs, The Nativity Story), and we do not see much of the Sheriff of Nottingham (Matthew MacFaydan, Pride & Prejudice, a very different role for him).
Although the acting is great, from Eleanor of Aquitaine (Eileen Atkins, Cold Mountain, Gosford Park) to Cate Blanchett as Maid Marian (The Lord of the Rings, The Aviator), the cinematography stole the show, which usually happens in a Ridley Scott film. The beautifully grand helicopter shots, the wide landscape and seascape images of the country, and the well lit sets were so vivid, it just left me in awe of how well Scott and his Director of Photography, John Mathieson, captured the lands of the film.
The greatest scene was the final battle at Dover Beach. Some have felt this to be too close to the Omaha Beach sequence in Saving Private Ryan, but it wasn’t in my opinion. The sea was a great place to fight, since most epic battles take place on large fields (Braveheart). The water splashing everywhere and the soaking foot soldiers gave more visuals to the battle. But all of the battles were good, not just that one. There is only so much one can do with a land battle, and it becomes monotonous. Also, many people feared that these battles would be too reminiscent of Kingdom of Heaven or Gladiator, but none of them were. Each battle had its own unique style and choreography. Also, it could not be paralleled with these films because there was no blood splattering all over the place, which I thought was good, because that too can get monotonous.
I highly recommend this movie. There is humor with Friar Tuck, King John, and the Merry Men. There is romance (but not too much) between Marian and Robin. As I said, there is brilliant action that many would enjoy. And the acting is also the greatest that some of these actors have done.
Next time: Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs, and From Dusk Until Dawn.
Iron Man- 3 stars; Iron Man 2- 4 stars
Iron Man is one of the greatest comic book movies ever made. Some might say the greatest. But I will not go that far because it has many problems in the story, acting and action.
There are two main problems and two smaller problems that I can pick out. First of all, I am not a fan of Gwyneth Paltrow. The movie did not have a complete script, just notes on how each scene would go and the main lines during the expository scenes. In the humorous scenes with Robert Downey Jr., he is improvising, and most of the actors can keep up with him. Paltrow, on the other hand, cannot. Pepper Potts, Paltrow’s character, is Tony Stark’s secretary and love interest, but whenever Paltrow is trying to do a scene with Downey Jr., you can tell she is improvising because it doesn’t feel natural, it feels forced. In fact, at some times, there are some long pauses and mumbling at which point you can tell she is trying to figure out what to say.
The second major problem is the end battle between Stark and Obadiah Stane (Jeff Bridges), aka Iron Monger. The battle is quick with little fighting, horrendously tacky lines, and quick punches that do not satisfy. I hoped for more because the action up to this point was very well done.
The smaller problems revolve around Jeff Bridges and Terrence Howard (James Rhodes). The acting in this film is not up to par with Robert Downey Jr. Jon Favreau, the director, surrounded Downey with mediocre actors that amplified their bad acting. Jeff Bridges is good in many of his other films (The Big Lebowski, K-Pax), but did not do a good job as a villain. Terrence Howard’s voice is annoying, period. I just couldn’t stand listening to his higher pitched voice.
This isn’t to say that it was all bad. The action before the ending battle is great. (SPOLIER ALERT) Iron Man in battle with terrorists at the beginning of the film and middle was great and I was cheering the whole time (END OF SPOILERS). Robert Downey Jr. has made a new name for himself with this movie, making the audience and filmmakers forget about his substance abuse and remind us of how great of an actor he is.
Iron Man 2 is leaps and bounds from the second one. This movie was supremely enjoyable with only one main flaw: Gwyneth Paltrow (again). She still doesn’t know how to improvise with Downey Jr., making huge pauses to cue the viewers that she now doesn’t know what to do (“Help me Robert! What do I say?). Sam Rockwell and Mickey Rourke as the two bad guys was a brilliant idea. Jon Favreau gave himself a bigger role as Happy Hogan (appearing only two times in the previous film). Don Cheadle is so much better than Terrence Howard. He is what I hoped Rhodey would have been in the first one. And the addition of Scarlett Johansson as Natasha Romanoff was a stroke of genius. And her bloody brilliant (sorry British children, forget I said that) fight sequence in a hall way left me cheering and on my feet.
The action improved and the final battle was better than the first one, but still a little fast. The audience hardly has time to enjoy it.
Over all, see these movies, but expect some predictability and some bad acting in the first movie and some more predictability in the second.
There are two main problems and two smaller problems that I can pick out. First of all, I am not a fan of Gwyneth Paltrow. The movie did not have a complete script, just notes on how each scene would go and the main lines during the expository scenes. In the humorous scenes with Robert Downey Jr., he is improvising, and most of the actors can keep up with him. Paltrow, on the other hand, cannot. Pepper Potts, Paltrow’s character, is Tony Stark’s secretary and love interest, but whenever Paltrow is trying to do a scene with Downey Jr., you can tell she is improvising because it doesn’t feel natural, it feels forced. In fact, at some times, there are some long pauses and mumbling at which point you can tell she is trying to figure out what to say.
The second major problem is the end battle between Stark and Obadiah Stane (Jeff Bridges), aka Iron Monger. The battle is quick with little fighting, horrendously tacky lines, and quick punches that do not satisfy. I hoped for more because the action up to this point was very well done.
The smaller problems revolve around Jeff Bridges and Terrence Howard (James Rhodes). The acting in this film is not up to par with Robert Downey Jr. Jon Favreau, the director, surrounded Downey with mediocre actors that amplified their bad acting. Jeff Bridges is good in many of his other films (The Big Lebowski, K-Pax), but did not do a good job as a villain. Terrence Howard’s voice is annoying, period. I just couldn’t stand listening to his higher pitched voice.
This isn’t to say that it was all bad. The action before the ending battle is great. (SPOLIER ALERT) Iron Man in battle with terrorists at the beginning of the film and middle was great and I was cheering the whole time (END OF SPOILERS). Robert Downey Jr. has made a new name for himself with this movie, making the audience and filmmakers forget about his substance abuse and remind us of how great of an actor he is.
Iron Man 2 is leaps and bounds from the second one. This movie was supremely enjoyable with only one main flaw: Gwyneth Paltrow (again). She still doesn’t know how to improvise with Downey Jr., making huge pauses to cue the viewers that she now doesn’t know what to do (“Help me Robert! What do I say?). Sam Rockwell and Mickey Rourke as the two bad guys was a brilliant idea. Jon Favreau gave himself a bigger role as Happy Hogan (appearing only two times in the previous film). Don Cheadle is so much better than Terrence Howard. He is what I hoped Rhodey would have been in the first one. And the addition of Scarlett Johansson as Natasha Romanoff was a stroke of genius. And her bloody brilliant (sorry British children, forget I said that) fight sequence in a hall way left me cheering and on my feet.
The action improved and the final battle was better than the first one, but still a little fast. The audience hardly has time to enjoy it.
Over all, see these movies, but expect some predictability and some bad acting in the first movie and some more predictability in the second.
Saturday, May 15, 2010
Johnny Depp Reviews
When I think of Johnny Depp, I think of the enormous talent that the man has. He has many successes. Also many failures, but I try to weigh a man’s brilliant films with his not so brilliant films like a scale.
His collaborations with Tim Burton, in my opinion, are not his greatest. I enjoyed Jack Sparrow as much as the next person, I loved his performance as Johnny Dillinger in Public Enemies, and his role as J.M. Barrie in Finding Neverland is his most emotional to date. As I look at these movies, I do not see the name of Tim Burton attached to these films. This is not to say that I didn’t love his take as the Mad Hatter or as the demon barber, Sweeney Todd, but every other role he has done with Tim Burton I did not care much for.
Edward Scissorhands is Tim Burton’s favorite movie that he did. The problems in this movie, however, are so many that it is impossible to list them all. This is not Depp’s best; he has vacant expressions that make us as an audience feels nothing except for the first time we meet him. He has no power behind his dialogue which is lost in the craziness of the film. The dialogue is short, unmoving, fast, choppy, and boring.
In Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, his performance is too creepy to describe. The movie is too weird and that is all I can say. The only thing good, and it isn’t enough to redeem the movie, is Depp’s creepy performance as Willy Wonka.
Sweeny Todd and Sleepy Hollow are Tim Burton’s two best films. The singing in the former is phenomenal, but the songs are chaotic. Whenever they sing, the melodies move around so much that it is incoherent. Depp would sing a chorus of one song and Carter would sing the song of another so fast to another song that is off beat to Depp’s and then they meet suddenly at one note that the two songs have in common and hold. This is the only problem with the movie, but it isn’t Burton’s fault, it is Steven Sondenheim’s fault. Johnny Depp is really good, along with the rest of the cast. The only reason to not see this movie is the bloodiness and goriness of the film. Sleepy Hollow only has one problem and that is the goriness. Every time the Headless Horseman slices off of person’s head, we actually see it. The horror could be so much more moving if we don’t see it. But again, Johnny Depp is good, but not his best performance.
Chocolat is great, but not Johnny Depp’s best. A movie that revolves around a woman who comes to a small French village during Lent and opens up a chocolaterie, Depp’s character is sorely underused. He plays a “pirate”, a river wandering gypsy who stops by the village and falls in love with the heroine. Johnny Depp is great, along with the rest of the cast which includes Alfred Molina, Dame Judi Dench, and Carrie Ann Moss.
Public Enemies has many good things about the movie, but all of them are outweighed by its horrendous editing. Depp is incoherent as Johnny Dillinger; he mumbles when he talks and it is so difficult to hear and understand what it is he is saying. The movie itself is not long, but the whole time you think it could be twenty to thirty minutes shorter. When I saw it in the theatre, I saw several people looking at their watches and nodding their heads as they fell asleep. I did the same thing.
Lastly, Finding Neverland is Depp’s greatest performance outside of the Pirate films. His role as J. M. Barrie was so heartbreaking, it deserved so many of the awards that Depp was nominated for but never won. Also, this movie has the greatest performance by Kate Winslet (and I am no fan of Winslet). Neverland is magical in every way. Some might say it is boring and hard to get into, but when you sit back and simply watch it for what it is worth, anyone can fall in love with Depp’s amazing portrayal.
See it: Finding Neverland, Chocolate, Sleepy Hollow, and Sweeney Todd (if you don’t mind a little bit of gore).
Don’t see it: Edward Scissorhands, Public Enemies, and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.
Next time: Iron Man and Iron Man 2
His collaborations with Tim Burton, in my opinion, are not his greatest. I enjoyed Jack Sparrow as much as the next person, I loved his performance as Johnny Dillinger in Public Enemies, and his role as J.M. Barrie in Finding Neverland is his most emotional to date. As I look at these movies, I do not see the name of Tim Burton attached to these films. This is not to say that I didn’t love his take as the Mad Hatter or as the demon barber, Sweeney Todd, but every other role he has done with Tim Burton I did not care much for.
Edward Scissorhands is Tim Burton’s favorite movie that he did. The problems in this movie, however, are so many that it is impossible to list them all. This is not Depp’s best; he has vacant expressions that make us as an audience feels nothing except for the first time we meet him. He has no power behind his dialogue which is lost in the craziness of the film. The dialogue is short, unmoving, fast, choppy, and boring.
In Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, his performance is too creepy to describe. The movie is too weird and that is all I can say. The only thing good, and it isn’t enough to redeem the movie, is Depp’s creepy performance as Willy Wonka.
Sweeny Todd and Sleepy Hollow are Tim Burton’s two best films. The singing in the former is phenomenal, but the songs are chaotic. Whenever they sing, the melodies move around so much that it is incoherent. Depp would sing a chorus of one song and Carter would sing the song of another so fast to another song that is off beat to Depp’s and then they meet suddenly at one note that the two songs have in common and hold. This is the only problem with the movie, but it isn’t Burton’s fault, it is Steven Sondenheim’s fault. Johnny Depp is really good, along with the rest of the cast. The only reason to not see this movie is the bloodiness and goriness of the film. Sleepy Hollow only has one problem and that is the goriness. Every time the Headless Horseman slices off of person’s head, we actually see it. The horror could be so much more moving if we don’t see it. But again, Johnny Depp is good, but not his best performance.
Chocolat is great, but not Johnny Depp’s best. A movie that revolves around a woman who comes to a small French village during Lent and opens up a chocolaterie, Depp’s character is sorely underused. He plays a “pirate”, a river wandering gypsy who stops by the village and falls in love with the heroine. Johnny Depp is great, along with the rest of the cast which includes Alfred Molina, Dame Judi Dench, and Carrie Ann Moss.
Public Enemies has many good things about the movie, but all of them are outweighed by its horrendous editing. Depp is incoherent as Johnny Dillinger; he mumbles when he talks and it is so difficult to hear and understand what it is he is saying. The movie itself is not long, but the whole time you think it could be twenty to thirty minutes shorter. When I saw it in the theatre, I saw several people looking at their watches and nodding their heads as they fell asleep. I did the same thing.
Lastly, Finding Neverland is Depp’s greatest performance outside of the Pirate films. His role as J. M. Barrie was so heartbreaking, it deserved so many of the awards that Depp was nominated for but never won. Also, this movie has the greatest performance by Kate Winslet (and I am no fan of Winslet). Neverland is magical in every way. Some might say it is boring and hard to get into, but when you sit back and simply watch it for what it is worth, anyone can fall in love with Depp’s amazing portrayal.
See it: Finding Neverland, Chocolate, Sleepy Hollow, and Sweeney Todd (if you don’t mind a little bit of gore).
Don’t see it: Edward Scissorhands, Public Enemies, and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.
Next time: Iron Man and Iron Man 2
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)