This was weak. I took my 7 year old and he thought Angry Birds was better. First off I wasn't impressed by the story line, it really didn't feel like the writers had thought about the end goal from the beginning and so it felt like it was crashing from one scene to the next - few of the scene felt like they really belonged in the film they were just put there as an excuse. I thought this was going to be more about the life of pets but then we get this revolutionary lot and I just don't think they fitted the story well it was like everything was crow-barred in. On the good side the animation was good, but some of the jokes, they got tiresome now and again. A lot of the action scenes I felt I'd seen before in other films.
Reviews
12 Reviews
Confine
(2013)
An idea with issues
14 March 2015
I saw this last night, and I try to keep up with British talent. As a low budget idea, this could and should work. Two people one location, room to explore; and with two female leads there is good scope here.
The result, unfortunately didn't match the potential. The dialogue was certainly weak, and plain off in many instances, but Kayleigh's performance as well as the delivery of her lines was below par from someone of her experience.
Lowe was the better actress, but was less utilised throughout the film with Bennett (Kayleigh) really being the lead and supposedly dictation direction; but she was a weak lead and came across more like an irritating school prefect than with any real menace.
The relationship between the two girls didn't really go anywhere - you'd expect in a film like this for there to be some exploration of the girls' motives - that they should really be getting into each other's head and doing some sort of subliminal psychological battle - but it never happened.
Alfie Allen was good - but he only had a small part in the role.
Overall the cinematography was good, but about half-way through I had the feeling that they changed from tape to digital - quite odd (but it might have just been me).
The lighting choices were wrong - very nicely lit from start to finish, but when Bennett is torturing Alfie??? Why is this still a nicely lit shot? Didn't get that at all.
Kudos for getting something on screen, and there are plusses, but there were to many minuses that I felt could have been addressed.
The result, unfortunately didn't match the potential. The dialogue was certainly weak, and plain off in many instances, but Kayleigh's performance as well as the delivery of her lines was below par from someone of her experience.
Lowe was the better actress, but was less utilised throughout the film with Bennett (Kayleigh) really being the lead and supposedly dictation direction; but she was a weak lead and came across more like an irritating school prefect than with any real menace.
The relationship between the two girls didn't really go anywhere - you'd expect in a film like this for there to be some exploration of the girls' motives - that they should really be getting into each other's head and doing some sort of subliminal psychological battle - but it never happened.
Alfie Allen was good - but he only had a small part in the role.
Overall the cinematography was good, but about half-way through I had the feeling that they changed from tape to digital - quite odd (but it might have just been me).
The lighting choices were wrong - very nicely lit from start to finish, but when Bennett is torturing Alfie??? Why is this still a nicely lit shot? Didn't get that at all.
Kudos for getting something on screen, and there are plusses, but there were to many minuses that I felt could have been addressed.
A Good Effort
18 December 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Unfortunately I missed the fist 20 minutes, so this might not qualify as a completely valid review.
Quite slow at first, once I got into it, it panned out really well - it had 'made for TV' feel to it - but the most of writer Chris Chibnall's work of that ilk, so no surprise.
There was never any attempt to glamour this, and from my knowledge of the events of the Great Train Robbery, this was a faithful and accurate account (but then, who's to know?).
Luke Evans, playing Bruce Reynolds, I enjoyed. It felt like a well- tempered performance - leading, but always on the edge, trying to keep his men together, but always being challenged -- it really felt like it was an act of will to keep all these guys working towards the plan.
There were some scenes that felt a little overly-long, but the story had to fit neatly into a hour and a half, so that's forgivable.
I loved the lighting, really added to the mood of the piece, without ever encroaching too much.
This was a simple re-telling, and didn't try to delve too much in motivation (apart from a bit of greed; opportunity, and a shade of glory). Families and sub-texts didn't really play a part, leaving us to focus on the events to hand, played chronologically.
Once you got into this, there was a gentle and pervasive grip that kept you comfortably hooked - not earth-shattering, but very satisfying.
Quite slow at first, once I got into it, it panned out really well - it had 'made for TV' feel to it - but the most of writer Chris Chibnall's work of that ilk, so no surprise.
There was never any attempt to glamour this, and from my knowledge of the events of the Great Train Robbery, this was a faithful and accurate account (but then, who's to know?).
Luke Evans, playing Bruce Reynolds, I enjoyed. It felt like a well- tempered performance - leading, but always on the edge, trying to keep his men together, but always being challenged -- it really felt like it was an act of will to keep all these guys working towards the plan.
There were some scenes that felt a little overly-long, but the story had to fit neatly into a hour and a half, so that's forgivable.
I loved the lighting, really added to the mood of the piece, without ever encroaching too much.
This was a simple re-telling, and didn't try to delve too much in motivation (apart from a bit of greed; opportunity, and a shade of glory). Families and sub-texts didn't really play a part, leaving us to focus on the events to hand, played chronologically.
Once you got into this, there was a gentle and pervasive grip that kept you comfortably hooked - not earth-shattering, but very satisfying.
Epic
(2013)
Flawed, but enjoyable
28 May 2013
Warning: Spoilers
I read some of the other reviews, and quite a few people have this summed up well - visually impressive; but the characters and story-line ... weak at best.
This is a mix of Star Wars, Avatar and a couple of other films (one of the writers admitted this), and they do appear to have torn a lot out of the book to make it fit the 'Hollywood' formula.
The story is bolted together, and while the parts are there, there is really a lack of craftsmanship in the way it is told and all brought together.
The characters are lacking, certainly. The snail and the slug, Grub and Mug, while occasionally bordering on annoying did win through in the end and provided much needed character to the whole adventure.
I went with my ten-year-old son, and asked him afterwards if he enjoyed it -- of course he did. I then asked him was it better than 'Ice Age'. No. Later, we got home, and he said it was the best day ever he'd had - we went to the cinema, ate out etc etc. But he didn't actually mention any part of the film again (it's normally 'do you remember the bit ...'). Part of an enjoyable day, yes, but the film - ultimately, a bit forgettable.
This is a mix of Star Wars, Avatar and a couple of other films (one of the writers admitted this), and they do appear to have torn a lot out of the book to make it fit the 'Hollywood' formula.
The story is bolted together, and while the parts are there, there is really a lack of craftsmanship in the way it is told and all brought together.
The characters are lacking, certainly. The snail and the slug, Grub and Mug, while occasionally bordering on annoying did win through in the end and provided much needed character to the whole adventure.
I went with my ten-year-old son, and asked him afterwards if he enjoyed it -- of course he did. I then asked him was it better than 'Ice Age'. No. Later, we got home, and he said it was the best day ever he'd had - we went to the cinema, ate out etc etc. But he didn't actually mention any part of the film again (it's normally 'do you remember the bit ...'). Part of an enjoyable day, yes, but the film - ultimately, a bit forgettable.
End of Watch
(2012)
I loved it
26 November 2012
Some mixed reviews on this, but I loved it -- once you get into the hand-held attitude it works really well. There's lots of banter between the two cops, revealing their home lives and perspectives on the world, but David Ayer is trying to show what really happens on the streets - and that's always subjective and not quite as much fun as the big explosive stuff.
Gyllenhaal is flawless throughout, and Pena also does a really good job. The film takes in all aspects of the cop's lives, not just their run on the streets. It gives an unglamourous view of what these guys do on a day to day basis.
Ayer - congrats - this works.
Gyllenhaal is flawless throughout, and Pena also does a really good job. The film takes in all aspects of the cop's lives, not just their run on the streets. It gives an unglamourous view of what these guys do on a day to day basis.
Ayer - congrats - this works.
Doctor Who
(1996 TV Movie)
Ooooooooooooooooooooooh...........
29 April 2011
Saw this the other day on terrestrial t.v. - just surprised at how bad it was - the script more limp than days old lettuce - it made me wonder how on earth this got to pre-production.
It was a pity as the film just followed some classic (read typical) US film lines - couple of car chases and a cliff-hanging will-he-won't-he save the day. He did.
This was simply not thought through; the producers (I'm guessing American) simply knew that there would be an audience for this, so whipped up this half-cooked pancake of an effort knowing it would get said audience.
A pity.
It was a pity as the film just followed some classic (read typical) US film lines - couple of car chases and a cliff-hanging will-he-won't-he save the day. He did.
This was simply not thought through; the producers (I'm guessing American) simply knew that there would be an audience for this, so whipped up this half-cooked pancake of an effort knowing it would get said audience.
A pity.
Outcasts
(2010–2011)
Flawed, but interesting
8 February 2011
Warning: Spoilers
A BBC drama set in outer space, appears to be non-the-less, a BBC drama. The location maybe 'way out', but the ideas, the sets, and the acting is quite down to earth.
Some good points: Hermione Norris is a step above the other actors - clear from the beginning. So far she's probably been quite under-stressed in her role. Jamie Bamber: Was quite engaging, and I found his character growing on me - pity he appeared to meet his demise in the first episode, which left me feeling what a waste... however, another reviewer has pointed out the reference to cloning in this episode, and a quick check on IMDb showed that the number of episodes he is in is not specified, leaving room for a return.
Some neutral point: The sets. Borrowed from Dr Who? I don't know, but they were in large part grey, and what with the dim (read 'atmospheric') lighting, gave a somewhat dull feel to events indoors. There were some very nicely lit shots, in particular when Eric meets his on-screen wife. Script was OK - some parts felt a little overwritten to me - Mr President speech was a bore, and the applause he received was a cringe.
Unsatisfactory points: They engaged me so little I can scare remember their names, but they 'pop-off' to go and hunt for Eric, dressed rather like a young couple off on a day's hiking: no hunting party, no evidence of planning etc. The Spaceship appears to crash: There are lowered heads. Oh well. Never mind. There was no real sign of celebration that new people were coming to town, nor any sense of real tragedy when however-many-people were killed. I would have expected a reaction like this had I informed the 'President' that I'd not be able to come round to watch football and drink beer... I was also confused as to why the 'President' was referred to a such - was he not more of a Governor? Couldn't figure that one out.
Overall: Difficult to say: Yes I'll be tuning in to watch episode 2 tonight, but I'll feel no need to push it to the last minute if it does not engage me more than the first episode. I can appreciate the effort that went into it, and I think a lot a people have put in a good shift; but am I compelled? Intrigued maybe, compelled, as yet, no.
Some good points: Hermione Norris is a step above the other actors - clear from the beginning. So far she's probably been quite under-stressed in her role. Jamie Bamber: Was quite engaging, and I found his character growing on me - pity he appeared to meet his demise in the first episode, which left me feeling what a waste... however, another reviewer has pointed out the reference to cloning in this episode, and a quick check on IMDb showed that the number of episodes he is in is not specified, leaving room for a return.
Some neutral point: The sets. Borrowed from Dr Who? I don't know, but they were in large part grey, and what with the dim (read 'atmospheric') lighting, gave a somewhat dull feel to events indoors. There were some very nicely lit shots, in particular when Eric meets his on-screen wife. Script was OK - some parts felt a little overwritten to me - Mr President speech was a bore, and the applause he received was a cringe.
Unsatisfactory points: They engaged me so little I can scare remember their names, but they 'pop-off' to go and hunt for Eric, dressed rather like a young couple off on a day's hiking: no hunting party, no evidence of planning etc. The Spaceship appears to crash: There are lowered heads. Oh well. Never mind. There was no real sign of celebration that new people were coming to town, nor any sense of real tragedy when however-many-people were killed. I would have expected a reaction like this had I informed the 'President' that I'd not be able to come round to watch football and drink beer... I was also confused as to why the 'President' was referred to a such - was he not more of a Governor? Couldn't figure that one out.
Overall: Difficult to say: Yes I'll be tuning in to watch episode 2 tonight, but I'll feel no need to push it to the last minute if it does not engage me more than the first episode. I can appreciate the effort that went into it, and I think a lot a people have put in a good shift; but am I compelled? Intrigued maybe, compelled, as yet, no.
War of the Worlds 2: The Next Wave
(2008 Video)
Truly awful
14 August 2010
I did my best to watch it to the end, but failed.
Worst element? The music - constantly in the background and totally inappropriate.
Some of the 'fight' scenes - laughably poor - just film someone with a bit of camera shake and you're supposed to believe they're having an interstellar dog-fight...
The sets... I kept on thinking they were going to fall down - extra supplies of sellotape anyone..?
I don't know what the budget was for this film, but someone, somewhere, thought, hey this is good enough to be filmed, let's spend money and time and effort on it.. but then it gives hope to many aspiring film makers - if they're willing to back this, then surely my efforts have a chance..?
Worst element? The music - constantly in the background and totally inappropriate.
Some of the 'fight' scenes - laughably poor - just film someone with a bit of camera shake and you're supposed to believe they're having an interstellar dog-fight...
The sets... I kept on thinking they were going to fall down - extra supplies of sellotape anyone..?
I don't know what the budget was for this film, but someone, somewhere, thought, hey this is good enough to be filmed, let's spend money and time and effort on it.. but then it gives hope to many aspiring film makers - if they're willing to back this, then surely my efforts have a chance..?
Resident Evil: Apocalypse
(2004)
Oooooooooooooooh, it's just sooooooooooo bad...
28 August 2009
This film is just so poor, and what is disappointing is that it had so much potential. Like many other commentators have noted, it is true that the cinematography is good - it has been executed expensively by people who know what they are doing. The script not only lets the film own, but is the hole that the the film falls ungracefully into. The movie makers obviously wanted a sequel, but had no idea of how to create one along the imaginative lines of the first film. What happens to the sequel, is that it falls into 'Dawn of the Dead' territory, and desperately does not know how to get out of it, bar repeating various scenes from the first film in mildly varying forms. The continuing masculinsation of the female characters is tedious - although the fight scenes are great. Milla continuously pops up at perfectly the right time with the key equipment - be it a motorbike or a cigarette. This film is so far removed from reality that it disappears up its own removed rear, without ever truly capturing the imagination which a fantasy feature simply has to do.
Congo
(1995)
Utterly dumb, but watchable
6 August 2009
I'm really not too sure why people are being so complimentary about this odd movie. Having said that - I did actually sit through the entire 2 hours and can't say it wasn't entirely un-entertaining.
I think the key problem is that Frank Marshall is not a true director and this is clear in the film - he is an experienced producer, so will have seen a movie made many a time, and will understand what goes into the process. But I think this is quite different to being able to truly direct a movie - the direction was competent, but somehow flat and direction-less. Marshall has more experience as a unit or second director, and this came through, I feel, in the finished product - it appeared to be a group of sets that failed to really have any continuity in its feel or its character.
Fun, watchable, but good? No.
I think the key problem is that Frank Marshall is not a true director and this is clear in the film - he is an experienced producer, so will have seen a movie made many a time, and will understand what goes into the process. But I think this is quite different to being able to truly direct a movie - the direction was competent, but somehow flat and direction-less. Marshall has more experience as a unit or second director, and this came through, I feel, in the finished product - it appeared to be a group of sets that failed to really have any continuity in its feel or its character.
Fun, watchable, but good? No.
Vanilla Sky
(2001)
A great film, greatly misunderstood.
17 November 2008
Warning: Spoilers
It is a good film, with many people being negative, and many more guessing wildly at its meaning. I think the film is complex, but less so than many people are suggesting.
When DA signs up for the Lucid Dream, he chooses the point at which he begins the dream, and this occurs outside the nightclub. Before that part, there is no dream-sequence apart from a couple of short bits at the beginning.
As for being cryogenically frozen - well, DA is frozen once he commits suicide. He does not go into the dream state when he is frozen. He has to wait until the technology is developed (this is stated in the film). Once the technology is developed to bring humans back from a frozen/dead state (re. the small dog on the TV) - DA can be brought back to life - but, crucially - he can either be brought to life and woken up, or he can go into a Lucid Dream of his choice (which he signed up for before committing suicide), which is what DA chooses to do - the start point of his dream being the scene outside of the nightclub.
The problem is that there is a nightmare element to his dream, as he committed suicide and is convinced that he 'killed someone' - (himself) - but gets confused as he tries to figure out who he killed.
The scenes with Kurt Russel where DA is wearing the mask is certainly part of his dream - he is self-analysing to try and find out what happened (which is haunting him).
He makes the decision to wake up to the real world (which is 200 years since he was frozen - stated in the film by the Tech Guy), and jumps off the building in order to wake himself up from the Lucid Dream, which is the way he wanted to be woken up, and the way he chose to wake up when he signed up for the Lucid Dream (also stated in the film).
This is a great film, and worth watching more than once (if not just to understand it) but is visually rich, and yes, Tom Cruise (of whom I am not a great fan) does act well - he is, as yet, no great master of the art, but executes a compelling performance. And yes, the music is spot on.
When DA signs up for the Lucid Dream, he chooses the point at which he begins the dream, and this occurs outside the nightclub. Before that part, there is no dream-sequence apart from a couple of short bits at the beginning.
As for being cryogenically frozen - well, DA is frozen once he commits suicide. He does not go into the dream state when he is frozen. He has to wait until the technology is developed (this is stated in the film). Once the technology is developed to bring humans back from a frozen/dead state (re. the small dog on the TV) - DA can be brought back to life - but, crucially - he can either be brought to life and woken up, or he can go into a Lucid Dream of his choice (which he signed up for before committing suicide), which is what DA chooses to do - the start point of his dream being the scene outside of the nightclub.
The problem is that there is a nightmare element to his dream, as he committed suicide and is convinced that he 'killed someone' - (himself) - but gets confused as he tries to figure out who he killed.
The scenes with Kurt Russel where DA is wearing the mask is certainly part of his dream - he is self-analysing to try and find out what happened (which is haunting him).
He makes the decision to wake up to the real world (which is 200 years since he was frozen - stated in the film by the Tech Guy), and jumps off the building in order to wake himself up from the Lucid Dream, which is the way he wanted to be woken up, and the way he chose to wake up when he signed up for the Lucid Dream (also stated in the film).
This is a great film, and worth watching more than once (if not just to understand it) but is visually rich, and yes, Tom Cruise (of whom I am not a great fan) does act well - he is, as yet, no great master of the art, but executes a compelling performance. And yes, the music is spot on.
Blood Monkey
(2006 Video)
Poorly thought-out
10 December 2007
It is a poor film, but it can be watched - more either while away the time, or as an example of how not to do things. Mr F is the only watchable actor, but his efforts are barely worth the film that it is in. Who puts good wine into a mug??? The film lacks tension - and as such it is not a 'whole film' - the lighting, music, atmosphere, do not co-conspire to create a tense environment - there is no 'mood' to the film which keeps the viewers locked in.
I also felt it quite blatantly stole from other films - 'Blair witch' and 'The Descent' in particular - most clearly toward the end, when the film decides it is obviously bored of its current direction and wishes to go off elsewhere following the lead of other, better films.
The young student actors are all pretty - (which is somewhat surprising since they are supposed to be anthropology student...) and none really leave a lasting impression aside from their good looks.
This was clearly a low budget film, with the monsters staying out of eye-sight until the end of the film (which could well have been a good move considering the paltry CGI employed).
I also felt it quite blatantly stole from other films - 'Blair witch' and 'The Descent' in particular - most clearly toward the end, when the film decides it is obviously bored of its current direction and wishes to go off elsewhere following the lead of other, better films.
The young student actors are all pretty - (which is somewhat surprising since they are supposed to be anthropology student...) and none really leave a lasting impression aside from their good looks.
This was clearly a low budget film, with the monsters staying out of eye-sight until the end of the film (which could well have been a good move considering the paltry CGI employed).
Tell Your Friends