Change Your Image
Malgus
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Lists
An error has ocurred. Please try againReviews
Hanna (2011)
Not sure what it was
I don't know what I was thinking when I picked this... thing. Hanna is one of the most ridiculous films I've seen in a while. It's female Mowgli meets Jason Bourne meets Alice in Wonderland. It's just utter nonsense. It's action, thriller with comedy and drama. It's a two hour mish-mash of absurdity, silly characters, and a few cheesy action scenes. This may sound like fun on paper, but it's anything but. Maybe there is some symbolism there, I have no idea. What I do know is that I had to take several 15 minute breaks from watching, because it was just so damn boring. If you want to see a young girl kicking ass, I suggest Chocolate (2008) with Jejaa Yanin.
John Carter (2012)
Padawan John Carter of Geonosis
John Carter (the movie) is based on Edgar Burroughs Barsoom series which has been quite thoroughly cannibalized in the last 100 years by numerous films, series, and other books. Virtually everything you see in this movie will feel like it's been ripped off from something else. And I'm not just talking about themes, but there are actual shots and scenes that look copy-pasted.
Andrew Stanton, who's made a name directing CGI cartoons like Toy Story, Finding Nemo, etc. seems to have read George Lucas' movie making manual and does the same thing which is throwing as much CGI garbage on the screen in hope that it will be exciting. No, I'm sorry but it isn't. Not when you have ridiculous characters and messy plot that needs to be explained through exposition every 15 minutes. I'm unsure why they even bothered with live action, because slightly tweaked and PG rated, this could've been a decent children's cartoon.
In its core JC is a love story wrapped in fantasy action-adventure jacket. Unfortunately, because everything is so shallow, humorless and artificial, it lacks any emotional gravity and becomes borderline boring. The lead actor is terribly miscast, in my opinion, and is completely devoid of any charisma. Llyn Collins who plays princess Leia..I mean Dejah is arguably the only interesting element in this entire film.
John Carter is a movie that drowns in its own ambition and ultimately fails due to its own incompetence. Is it total garbage? Heck no. It could've been worse if they had hired a little kid to play John Carter, and Adam Sandler to play the villain. If you think that Attack of the Clones was the bestest Star wars movie ever, then you'll probably like John Carter too. Otherwise, it's a just mediocre two hour time-waster... for 5 year olds.
The Homesman (2014)
Could've been a masterpiece
Homesman left me with some mixed feelings. I really liked the idea and theme of this movie, but certain aspects of the storytelling are just ridiculous.
The story takes place in 1850s Nebraska where a small community of homesteaders decides to send three mad women to a home in Iowa. Mary Bee Cuddy (Hilary Swank), a seemingly strong and independent spinster, volunteers for the task of transporting these women. Along the way she meets George Briggs (Tommy Lee Jones), a scruffy-looking drifter and claim jumper, whom she rescues from certain death and subsequently recruits to help her complete the journey.
Homesman presents the viewer with rather depressing yet captivating tale of pioneering existence and hardships with particular focus on women. It's obviously something that you don't see very often in an average western.
The main issue with the film is that it suddenly loses momentum by switching its focus from Mary Bee Cuddy onto George Briggs. It's strange because Briggs is inherently far less interesting character than Cuddy; and by essentially promoting him from support role to the lead role, the film undermines its own feminist vibe. As a result the final 30 or so minutes feel like rather lengthy and pointless epilogue. It should be noted that this happens in the novel as well, so in that regard the film stays true to it. Yet it still doesn't make much sense to me.
Another minor issue with the movie can be attributed to the character of Mary Bee. The reason for her personal drama is extremely implausible. The idea that a successful, hard-working woman -- a woman capable of childbearing -- had trouble finding husband due to being "plain" looking, is quite frankly silly. This is almost the exact opposite of what was really going on in that specific period. The fact that many people lost their minds due to harsh conditions is true, but ironically, that is the same reason why someone like Mary Bee could've never been single for long.
In short, Homesman is a movie that gets period ambiance right, but produces a rather disjointed story with bizarre twist. It is still something that is worth watching, in my opinion. Both Tommy Lee Jones and Hilary Swank deliver very impressive performances.
The Slut (2011)
Not for everyone
I usually try to watch as many films as possible that get a nomination at Cannes, and The Slut was such movie (even though it didn't win anything there). This is basically one person production: created and directed by the Israeli filmmaker, Hagar Ben Asher. She also acts in it.
The story is about a single mother, Tamar, who lives in a rural area with her two daughters and works at a chicken farm. She's obsessed with sex and provides sexual favors to various men in the village. One day she meets Shai, a veterinarian, and starts a relationship with him.
The best I can describe this film in one word is.. weird. It uses strange symbolism and is very minimalistic in its approach, from screenplay to acting. The cinematography is actually quite impressive for something with virtually no budget. It attempts to make a character study, but spectacularly forgoes nearly all characterization. Something tells me it was done on purpose, but something like this can potentially leave the viewer completely detached from the characters. The end result may therefore seem like nothing more than cinematic expressionism of sorts.
Having said that, I kind of liked The Slut. It's uncanny and raw. Uncanny because while being set in a boring environment, it manages to produce a surreal scenario (at least from where I'm standing). It's sad, disturbing and yet strangely fascinating. It should be obvious that this movie isn't for everyone. Do not expect casual entertainment. Do not expect some sort of porno either. It does have graphic sex scenes and some reviewers even screamed "unsimulated sex". The lead actor categorically denied this, so I'll take his word for it. Not that it really matters. But if graphic sexual content offends you, please do everyone a favor, and DO NOT WATCH this. Otherwise, it's a pretty unconventional and interesting piece of indie film-making.
Fifty Shades of Grey (2015)
Garbage chic extraordinaire
50 Shades of Grey is without a doubt the worst box-office hit that Hollywood has ever produced.
It's an (unintentionally) hilarious tale of two dimwitted individuals who have an absurd sex affair. Certain Anastasia Steele, a virginal student, is so horny that she apparently can't figure out that a douchey billionaire Christian Grey who wants to spank her ass, might actually hurt her. So to figure this out, she ASKS him to whip her ass really hard. And when he does, she gets upset and leaves, thus concluding the "romance". It's pure comedy gold.
None of the characters have any idea why they do or say things, and neither do the actors. The whole story is filled with contradictions and even paradox. The script in this movie is truly something special. To see two grown-up people trying to utter those asinine lines and making total fools out of themselves is why this may be worth watching. They were sitting there behind a conference table and discussing anal fisting and butt plugs like two politicians who are negotiating a peace treaty.
Neither actor has much to go on with in terms of characterization. Their characters can only be objectively described using oxymorons. Dakota Johnson who plays Anastasia sticks with shy schoolgirl routine. Jamie Dornan who plays Christian sticks with being confused or annoyed. Sam Taylor-Johnson who plays the director apparently has no clue about what to do with this mess either. She was basically handed an explicit porno book ... uh, I mean "erotic romance" and asked to make it into an R-rated movie. So she cleaned it up, made it pretty and shiny. The music tracks play almost non-stop in this movie. Rumor has it that E.L. James (the wicked witch who spawned this 50 shades franchise) was haunting the production set and screaming in a bullhorn, "Don't touch my story. Undress Jamie Dornan now!!!" Maybe this is why the pacing is out of whack and editing is strange at some places.
The "erotic" scenes are by far the most boring part of the film. When Grey made a speech and said, "I don't make love, I flog hard", for some reason I expected to see Jason Statham vs. Amy Smart type of action (Crank). Instead we get a few sleep-inducing commercials for hygiene products loosely inspired by 9 and 1/2 weeks. Anastasia gets blindfolded all the time which paralyzes her and makes her gasp for air. Not sure why. The so-called S&M sequence was a welcome comic relief though. Someone decided it would be funny to accompany this burlesque show montage by "Crazy in Love" song played at 1/2 speed. They were right because it made Beyonce sound a bit.. stoned.
So there you have it. Cheesy, sanitized, visual re-enactment of atrociously written porn fanfic, which in terms of filmmaking fails to measure up even to the crappiest sexploitation flicks from the 70s, somehow grosses half a billion. Isn't that true magic of cinema, or what? Well done, Universal. This thing was promoted and advertised in every corner of this planet, from Cambodia to Zimbabwe. And the person who thought it should be marketed as a romantic Valentine's Day movie certainly deserves some sort of award. Maybe a golden cactus butt plug or something, because that was pure genius.
I normally don't rate movies with ones or tens, for even the worst movies (I've seen) have some sort of creative spark behind them. or at the very least serve as means for some silly people to express themselves. But in this case, I fail to see anything other than desire to exploit gullible masses and make profit out of nothing. A product of abysmal quality that was simply slapped together and put in pretty packaging to be marketed and sold -- not dissimilar to the malfunctioning 50 Shades lube (no joke).
Wild Card (2015)
Incoherent and rather dull
Wild Card should've been a 20 minute short, but is for some reason stretched to 90 minutes. It's not a typical Jason Statham movie, in case you're wondering. The plot revolves around Nick who's your stereotypical go-to problem-solver bodyguard guy who lives in Las Vegas. One day he helps his friend (a prostitute) to avenge brutal rape and beating, and gets in trouble with local mobsters.
This simple plot is fine, but it gets diluted with completely meaningless attempts to make some sort of character study of Nick. For nearly half of the movie we see Nick drinking, Nick talking, Nick gambling, Nick dreaming. Why oh why was that necessary? And then we have a boring and uninteresting character of Cyrus, a guy who wants to befriend Nick, and who takes up lots of screen time for no apparent reason. I haven't read Heat (Willem Goldman's novel), nor watched 1986 movie adaptation, so I can't say whether this film is true to the book. But in Wild Card the elements just don't seem to come together and form a harmonious picture. Statham is given too much to act, so that he generally looks rather bored throughout. The movie tries to create a noir vibe but it's inconsistent. The fight scenes -- all 3 of them -- are pretty impressive, and are probably the only possible reason to watch this.
Overall, this was rather disappointing effort.
Skyfall (2012)
Lacks big robots and lasers to complete the picture
Granted, Judie Dench tried to play a robot, but it's not enough. How this film can get such a high score is beyond me. Some sorry excuse for a villain concocts mind-boggling convoluted plan that involves hacking all London, blowing up MI6, capturing Bond, then surrendering to Bond, escaping -- all that supposedly to hurt and kill "M". I don't suppose he could just walk in her apartment (like Bond did) and simply shoot her. And Bond who gets shot, falls off the train into the abyss, and is even shown drowning, then somehow makes miraculous recovery. I mean, seriously?!
Now I realize Bond movies aren't really supposed to be realistic, but this is beyond ridiculous. This was written by an 8 year old for 5 year olds. The idiot plot, poor screenplay, mediocre acting. The action reminded me of Wild Wild West movie with Will Smith, except that WWW was a comedy, and this isn't. I can't believe that I actually got bored watching this.
The Machine (2013)
Wasted opportunity
Unfortunately, The Machine struggles to bring anything original to the table. It's a highly overused cliché of an evil military guy wanting a weapon, and naive scientist wanting a "cure". In this case we are talking about sentient AI. And of course they had to put the AI in a hot chick, or otherwise, who'd watch it.
After watching this I couldn't help but think that the movie had a lot of potential. It seems to throw ideas on the screen but doesn't develop any of them. There is no moral dilemma or even a philosophical question. The one-dimensional villain is established as sadistic psychopath right from the start. The story had the opportunity to explore more complicated ideas such as for example transhumanism with more depth, but it chooses to go in the direction of a cheesy action thriller, occasionally using unsubtle techniques to elicit emotion from the audience.
Although technically The Machine isn't awful, I'd say the production might've run into some budget problems. I'm speculating of course but it looks like they used all the money on a few SFX, and had none to make the sets. Everything is taking place in either airplane hanger or some dark basement which is supposed to be state-of-the-art military research facility. The movie is dark, literally dark. The actors do a decent job, although only Toby Stephens has a role here. Caity Lotz makes a passable robot, and has her moments.
I don't believe The Machine is a smart Sci-Fi, but it's Sci-Fi which is a step above comic-book-based CGI cartoons that roll out of Hollywood factories every year. Might be worth a rental.
Predestination (2014)
Little Sci-Fi gem
Predestination deals with one of the (possible?) paradoxes of time travel. It's about a temporal agent who attempts to catch a notorious terrorist bomber... or is it? I can't say more without giving away spoilers.
The movie is I think exceptionally well made. Starting with writing and ending with little details. It should be obvious that it's not something that has plenty of CGI, robots or lasers. Instead, you should expect lengthy dialogues and monologues. It will nevertheless keep you glued to the screen and attempt to mess with your mind. Whether it succeeds depends on you. I guess some of its twists are predictable, but you'll probably still end up watching it twice.
The two leads, Ethan Hawke and Sarah Snook are fantastic. Truly great performances especially from Snook, whom I'd never heard of before. Give Predestination a go.
Gone Girl (2014)
Over-hyped lackluster silliness
Overall Gone Girl was pretty disappointing considering the hype. The movie is definitely watchable, especially the first half, but then it takes a leap in the realm of absurdity.
The cinematography is excellent but that's a given with Fincher. The main characters are rather boring. While I can't say that Ben Affleck's and Rosamund Pike's acting is bad per se, but they both seem to lack screen presence to make themselves interesting and intriguing.
The main problem, at least for me, is the lack of genuine suspense. It just fails to grab your interest. Maybe it's because there have been so many movies and shows with the same theme, I don't know. Ben Affleck fails to transition from "good guy" to "bad guy" and back. He's just too bland to be either liked or disliked. When the major reveal happens (sometime in the middle), you kind of already know this was going to happen. Maybe not exactly THAT, but definitely something like that. And then it just abandons any common sense, rolls down the hill, hits a cow, and ends with a cliffhanger.
I'd say that whether you enjoy this movie will depend on your expectations. If you expect something really clever, don't bother. On the other hand, if you watch it with an empty head and forget about things like logic, you might be entertained... unless you fall asleep. And oh yes, seeing Ben Affleck's junk may cause nightmares, so beware.
Taken 3 (2014)
Hopefully they won't make more
The first Taken was a decent flick, particularly due to its combination of action and thriller, and its theme. Watching a father doing all he can to save his daughter from the worst fate possible and deliver justice to the scumbags responsible, was strangely enjoyable and satisfying. It wasn't a particularly realistic movie, but it still felt fresh among countless "Michael Bay" type action circus films. The second one was quite disappointing. It was defiled by Olivier Megaton's directing skills, absurd antics, pathetic villain, and...well, Maggie Grace. Yet it still had at least some residual Taken flavor to it. And now we have THIS.
Arguably Tak3n is even worse than its predecessor. It has more in common with Columbiana than it has with original Taken: ridiculous plot, dumb bulletproof hero, dumb bad guys, even dumber cops, absurd PG-13 action in shaky-cam. Only instead of Zoe Saldana, we get to see bored elderly citizen a.k.a Liam Neeson fighting Russian thugs in underwear.
It's kind of strange that Luc Besson and Co don't seem to understand what made Taken stand out. I had thought that perhaps Taken 2 was a misfire, an unfortunate accident, but apparently not. I guess they truly believe that common sense has no place in action movies. Needless to say, if you're expecting something resembling the original movie, don't bother with this.