The Great Gatsby looks and sounds (!) incredibly good and yet feels… MoreThe Great Gatsby looks and sounds (!) incredibly good and yet feels like nothing. In a marvel of lush images, a truly astounding soundtrack (rap and the 20s, what a perfect mix! Really, that soundtrack kills it. Superb.) and gimme-an-Oscar performances, the emotions somehow completely fall through. A bit unexpected from Baz Luhrmann, who jerked more than one tear with equally opulent Romeo & Juliet and Moulin Rouge. Yet The Great Gatsby, a novel than lives off great prose, proves much more difficult to adapt than Shakespearian classics. The elusive quality of the novel simply does not translate onto the screen, no matter how hard Luhrmann tries, even by rather ham-handedly writing the words on screen.
The film ends up being a beautiful shell, albeit worth watching, with great performances by DiCaprio and Mulligan and a not-so-great one, as usual, by Maguire. It is entertaining, it is decadent, exquisite, pretty - but at no point does it manage to tell a story the audience would actually care about. Let's blame Fitzgerald for writing an unadaptable novel, shall we?
J.J. Abrams makes Star Trek films on crack - here we have all the… MoreJ.J. Abrams makes Star Trek films on crack - here we have all the ingredients of an Abrams film, explosions, stunts, fights, action, but infused lovingly with, well, Star Trek. After his ingenious start into the reboot, I didn't expect another great film - but Abrams' Star Trek simply works. He tells an action-filled story as probably only he can, appealing to young audiences who have never really watch the original Star Trek and would probably laugh at it. And yet he fills Into Darkness with so many references, such an interesting retelling of The Wrath of Khan, so many insider jokes and nods to Star Trek episodes and films that any Trekkie will enjoy him/herself. I certainly did.
The all-new cast continues to work well, I especially loved Karl "Bones" Urban and Simon "Scotty" Pegg, who get considerably more screentime than in the first film. Urban and Pegg channel Kelley and Doohan perfectly while bringing their own twist to the roles we all know so well. The rest of the new cast is also great still - but they all get a good ass kicking by Benedict Cumberbatch, who is the perfect villain. Devilishly good-looking, he is so deliciously evil as Khan that he certainly made me forget that there was a Khan before him.
The movie is a lot of kaboom - but it also is a lot of nerdy love for the Original Series, a great nod to everything that made people like me into Trekkies long ago. A non-scifi-fan next to me lauded the apparently great 3D (I can't watch 3D, so I could have gladly done without it), the humour and the general entertainment factor, so there should be something for everyone. Perfect mainstream cinema. Perfect homage to the old days.
Mad, sinister, dark, violent fun with so many meta jokes it's… MoreMad, sinister, dark, violent fun with so many meta jokes it's difficult to keep track. Hilariously funny, brilliantly cast, better than slightly boring In Bruges but with the same snappy dialogue. A must see!
Leave it to Peter Jackson to make an entertaining film out of about 5… MoreLeave it to Peter Jackson to make an entertaining film out of about 5 pages of actual story. The Hobbit might be a little too long, but I never got bored, thanks to immaculate direction and a great cast. Martin Freeman was an inspired casting choice, he is funny and likeable as always. I'd have much preferred a traditional 2D film, though, as 3D images have an artificial feel that Jackson absolutely does not need to enhance the amazing cinematography. I watched this in 2D, due to not being able to watch 3D images without getting terrible headaches (yes, and of course that is a huge reason for my dislike of the technology), and some images seemed to be shot too obviously for 3D effect, rendering them cliché when watched in 2D.
Overall, I am looking forward to the next instalments - but not with the same eagerness I waited for the next Lord of the Rings film back in the day.
If you can push aside the glaring sexism all over this film and ignore… MoreIf you can push aside the glaring sexism all over this film and ignore some painfully unfunny jokes and a terribly predictable outcome, there is some fun to be had. Most of that is thanks to Anna Faris.
What this is: Cheap thrills, good entertainment. What this goes with:… MoreWhat this is: Cheap thrills, good entertainment. What this goes with: Popcorn. Keeping this is mind, this is very decent fun. Solid mainstream fare.
Half way through I had to pause - and was astonished to see that we… MoreHalf way through I had to pause - and was astonished to see that we had another 45 minutes to go. At this point, the film already felt several hours long. This could have and should have been better, but a more innovative approach by the director would have been necessary to pull this above and beyond snappy dialogue exchanges and some nice shots. Also, Johnny Depp looks extremely good - but when was the last time he didn't look, talk and walk like Johnny Depp in a film? He lost his magic somewhere during those Pirate movies. A different casting choice would have been wise, if only to avoid déjà-vu moments - sometimes I felt overwhelmingly reminded of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. But of course this very boring, shallow and lacklustre exercise in filmmaking has not even one tenth of that film's boldness.
Popcorn cinema. Just that, no more, no less. Tom Hardy and Chris Pine… MorePopcorn cinema. Just that, no more, no less. Tom Hardy and Chris Pine go with it and have fun, which is actually quite enjoyable to watch.
An entertaining film, but not a great one. While this contains many… MoreAn entertaining film, but not a great one. While this contains many moments that will speak to any movie buff and Hitchcock fan, this also entails a very lacklustre, uninspired "love story" in wild disregard for the actual version of events and the extend of Hitchcock's obsessiveness. Helen Mirren carries this part of the story brilliantly. Anthony Hopkins is weighed down by his mask and basically only has his voice to deliver great one-liners and Hitchcock bonmots. A little less emphasis on making him look like Hitchcock would have greatly benefited his performance or rather ability to perform. However, this is highly entertaining and a must-see for Hitchcock fans.
I have a confession. Several. I like Evita. I LOVE Chicago. I adore… MoreI have a confession. Several. I like Evita. I LOVE Chicago. I adore Moulin Rouge. I can recite Sound of Music. I used to love Glee. Yeah, I am one of those. I am a sucker for all things musical. So really any new film version of "Les Mis" sounds good from the get go. Read some bad reviews in advance, though. By people who obviously hate musicals. Because there really is no middle ground with these - hate or love. Love for me. And love for Les Miserables.
Everything I didn't like about Tom Hooper's direction of The King's Speech, I liked in Les Mis. The artificial feel, the theatricality? Perfect match for a musical. What makes this film special is the unique way in which the musical numbers were shot - live during shooting, letting the actors use their voices instead of trying to act and lipsynch at the same time. Some notes come out rough, making the musical acting very authentic, very raw and a great contrast to the "fakeness" of the production design and staging. The cinematography adds both intimacy and a feeling of claustrophobia, very uniquely done with many close-ups and wide angles.
Hugh Jackman, Anne Hathaway and Eddie Redmayne are the outstanding members of a great ensemble cast. I mean, when I even like Russell Crowe, something remarkable must have happened. Tom Hooper somehow manages to draw these amazing performances out of actors, just as he did in The King's Speech. Hugh Jackman's opening and closing scenes and Anne Hathaway's "I dreamed a dream" & "Come to me" scream "Oscar" so loudly, I wouldn't even be surprised if Jackman steals the trophy from Daniel Day-Lewis. Anne Hathaway should be a sure thing, there was no other supporting performance that powerful this year.
Now, can I go see it again, please?