Write a mini-review of the last movie you've seen, whether it was in the theater, in the airplane or at home.

TRY TO KEEP SPOILERS AT A MINIMUM!


I Am Legend

Starring: Will Smith
Seen at: Cinema

Storyline's done before (28 Days Later), but it's been pulled off decently in this flick. The special effects guys have done a very good job of transforming New York City into the desolate wasteland it is in the film, and Will Smith does a believable job of portraying someone who's on the brink of losing sanity. All in all, atmospheric and suspenseful, and touching at moments. What's less impressive are the 'other' special effects though, which really cheapen the overall experience. Surely, someone should've noticed halfway during the production and decided to do something about it? Anyway, if you watch the film, you'll know what I'm talking about.

Score: 6.5 out of 10
[Reply]

Film: Pan's Labyrinth
in spanish "El Laberinto del Fauno"

Director: Guillermo del Toro

I saw it some days ago in DVD with DTS and it is a very very very nice movie.
Its all in spanish, :-( but it's very well produced, and it has very good spectial effects.
It has some details of roman/greek mythology.

the name in english is "Pan's Labyrinth", references to the creature as a greek God Pan, but the original title "El Laberinto del Fauno" references to the creature (Faun) witch is a Roman mythologic creature

IMDB:
In 1944 fascist Spain, a girl, fascinated with fairy-tales, is sent along with her pregnant mother to live with her new stepfather, a ruthless captain of the Spanish army. During the night, she meets a fairy who takes her to an old faun in the center of the labyrinth. He tells her she's a princess, but must prove her royalty by surviving three gruesome tasks. If she fails, she will never prove herself to be the the true princess and will never see her real father, the king, again

Score: 8.5 out of 10
[Reply]

Film: The Hogfather
Starring: Great A'Tuin and some of his/her parasites.
Seen on: DVD
At long last one of Terry Pratchetts Discworld books finally gets the live action treatment. Probably the best Discworld book to be adapted as there is little of the worlds mythology and the amount that there is is easily explained. I have to say that i found some of the casting to be poor at best. Mark Warrens Teatime (Te-ah tim-eh) had the most annoying psuedo American accent. Nigel Planer as the wizard was too old, Joss Akland was again too old and don't talk too me about Nobby Nobbs. As you are reading this it may sound as though i hated it. Well i didn't. I just have different characters in mind when i read the books. It is a good adaptation and stays true too the book but just doesn't quite hit the mark for me.

Score:7 out of 10
[Reply]

When a book you are already a fan of is finally adapted into a film the characterisation is never perfect. I had the same problem with Lord of the Rings, but I still enjoyed the films because I just accepted it.

I also really enjoyed The Hogfather when it was originally aired a year ago. Very nicely made, and although as you say some characters were not quite right for their parts, or they were too old, they all acted well and made it an enjoyable experience.

Now to the last film I watched.

Film: The Golden Compass
Stars: Nicole Kidman, Daniel Craig, Dakota Blue Richards, Ian McKellen, Eva Green, Christopher Lee... and too many more to list.
Seen at: Cinema

This is one of the current "must see" films everyone is talking about. I read the books a few years ago and really enjoyed them. The second book especially. So I was excited to see how they had converted it into a film.

The first book, and this film, really just introduce you to the universe, dust, the Alethiometer, and the characters the form the good and evil sides of the story. It is the second, and next film, where things will really get interesting.

The big problem with this film is that in the book many aspects remained a mystery until later, when they were either slowly discovered and unveiled, or left unanswered until the next book. In the film everything gets answered straight away, or the audience is told about it instantly. Therefore is really removed most of the mystery from the story.

*spoiler warning*
*
*
*
In the first book you don't even discover what dust can do or in the existence of alternative worlds. But in the film you are told all about it in the first few minutes of the film starting.

*spoiler over*

I would say that the film feels on a level with the recent Narnia film. That also didn't live up to the book, or the original BBC production. It followed the story fine, but played it by numbered without much real feeling injected by the director. Especially when you compare it to how the Lord of the Rings films were directed and produced.

You could also compare The Golden Compass to Happy Potter. The first Potter film did a brilliant job of introducing the audience to the mysteries of the magical world and Hogwarts, and The Golden Compass should have been told in a similar manor.

But don't get me wrong, this film is still very nicely made and the characters are well cast too. The only ones I was not 100% convinced by were the bears. The animation hasn't quite polished enough for the level we have come to expect. And also the film leans heavily on CG in nearly ever scene.

If you haven't read the books I expect you will enjoy the film more because the whole story and universe will be new and interesting. If you have read the books then you will still enjoy the film, but will be a little disappointed about the lack of mystery or the dulled down characters and world.

It should have been made in a similar vain to Lord of the Rings, aimed at adults and approached from a serious perspective. Instead it has been directed with children firmly in mind and has suffered for it.

Score: 6 out of 10
[Reply]

Apparently, The Golden Compass was a box-office disappointment (it didn't even rake in enough cash to break even), so now it's a question whether New Line is willing to continue the series.

I'll still go see it - even if it might not be a perfect film, from what I've seen in trailers it's a fun piece of entertainment.
[Reply]

I've also heard that it hasn't done well at the box office, which seems odd as all the kids seem to be talking about it. Maybe it actually came out at the wrong time of year. It's definitely not a bad film and I would say it is much better than the recent Narnia effort.
[Reply]

Inside

Inside is a french movie, called Ŕ l'intérieur in France, definitely not for a fragile stomach. IMDb link here.

Entertainment value: 6/10
Violence: 11/10
Sex: 0/10
Litres of tomato ketchup: About 100
Abdominal delivery with scissors: 1
[Reply]

Next
Starring: Nicholas Cage
Seen: Sky Movies

This film has a very interesting premise. A guy who can see 2 minutes into his own future at all times. Imagine what you could do with such a gift? You would know exactly what was about to happen all of the time!

If it was me I would be playing roulette until each casino banned me!

Anyway... apart from his gift he has also been seeing a vision of a woman walking into a diner. He knows the time she will enter, but not the day or if it is am or pm. So he has been visiting the diner twice a day until she turns up, as for some reason he can so see her much further than 2 minutes into the future.

So in the film she does eventually walk into the diner and he persuades her to give him a lift to Flagstaff. But a series of events sees them having to stop overnight in a motel.

Whilst this is going on the FBI have found out about his unique gift and are therefore very interested in getting hold of him to use for their own purposes. With a situation currently taking place where a terrorist group are going to set off a nuclear bomb and the FBI need his help to locate it. But the terrorist group also know about him so are trying to kill him before the FBI can get their hands on him.

It isn't the most amazing plot in the world, but the parts of the film when he is using his ability to predict what is about to happen is very well done and creates some great action sequences worth watching it for.

Score: 6/10
[Reply]

I've seen Next, no too bad, I would also give it a 6/10.

Supersexy hot girls: 1 (I love Jessica )
[Reply]

Movie: Doomsday
Certificate: 18 (AFAIK)
Release: May 9
Length: 101 mins (approx)
Cast: Alexander Siddig, Bob Hoskins, and more...

Plot Outline: A deadly plague infects Scotland and wipes out the population

First things first, this IS quite gory. Not schlock-horror gory, but well implemented gory. The next thing I noticed about the movie was how similar it was to a wide range of other movies out there. There are strains of Aliens; Resident Evil; 28 Days Later; Mad Max and Escape from New York/L.A, but with some seriously cool gadgetry thrown in.

The strange thing is the movie almost manages to outdo each of the individual parts quite effectively. The panic by the heroes certainly matches Aliens, but as they are English, there is something distinctly more ordered and less gung-ho. The virus is far more deadly than the Resident Evil/28 Days Later virus, which does lead to an interesting set of circumstances for the heroes. The vehicle ideas from the Mad Max movies make a comeback, in various guises; although the good guys do get the best vehicle in the movie (at least, that's what James May would say).

The movie itself is quite well acted, although I was hoping to see someone like Gary Oldman in one of the roles, as he would have fitted well, but certainly would have been beyond the budget of the makers. It's great to see Bob Hoskins getting down and dirty in a role closer to Mona Lisa than Roger Rabbit. It was also good to see Alexander Siddig making an welcome return to the screen.

The soundtrack is great, with music from seminal 80's stars Adam and the Ants and Frankie Goes To Hollywood. The visual effects are quite visceral, yet done with a sense of need, with the camera panning away from certain moments, leaving the viewer to witness the after-effects, rather than putting them through the whole experience. The death at the barbecue is certainly one to watch for.
Some elements of the movie (probably a bit like this review) seem a bit piecemeal, with a lack of explanation as to how or why. Perhaps this is a ploy to release a Director's Cut DVD at some point. I get the sense that the movie was more destined to be about 2 hours long, but perhaps costs cut it short.

Overall, a good film, made better by the fact that it wasn't the usual London/New York/L.A. plight, but rather a film set in Glasgow and the wilds of Scotland. An enjoyable way to spend a couple of hours and certainly a movie that reminds the world that the UK can still make good movies, and usually on a much lower budget than it would have done in the States.

Overall: 7.5/10 (the main problem is the disjointed sequences that just have no linking footage, plus the fact that it is essentially a re-hash of most post-apocalyptic movies out there (albeit done with a certain sense of style and flair) which automatically lead to comparisons being made)
[Reply]