Change Your Image
asiduodiego
Reviews
Joker (2019)
Great movie by itself. But I have a conceptual criticism about it.
Joker is a great film. The performances are excellent, and all in all, is well rounded and chilling film. Joaquin Phoenix has demonstrated to be one of the best actors of our generation, and this film is going to be remembered as one of his more intense and memorable roles. I can't say much more about the film itself but to check it out.
My only issue is not about the movie itself, but with the concept of the movie. The movie is a psychological drama, and deals with urban alienation and realistic violence. It is very heavy. But, while watching the movie, then the Batman references came out and I thought "Oh yeah, this is a Batman movie. This guy is the Joker, you know, the same character which in another incarnation participated in a surf contest with Batman". It felt odd. The Joker is a comic-book character, and although you can touch serious subjects with these characters, I think it's very difficult to make something SO serious. In Dark Knight, for example, the movie touched many serious subjects, but the movie itself was an action and crime drama, so it felt in the right context. In this case, it was a bit odd.
But, that is a meta criticism, and it's not in detriment of the movie itself which is excellent. If you want to see a serious movie, about serious subjects, watch this, and also, The King of Comedy and Taxi Driver, which were a direct inspiration for this movie.
10/10
Ghostbusters (1984)
The mystery of why this movie is so good
For me, Ghostbusters is a very special movie. I watched when I was very little, and it has been one of my favorites movie during my whole life. I loved the movie when I was young, and then, when I grew up, it became even better when many jokes and plot points I didn't get as a kid, finally made sense. But the question remains, why this movie is so good?.
I think the enduring charm of Ghostbusters is that is a perfect mix of comedy and horror. The movie is a comedy, but it takes itself completely seriously in its absurd premise, so the movie feels completely grounded in reality. It's basically our world, but with real ghosts in it (I think it helps that Dan Aykroid actually believes in all this weird stuff). This makes al the tension in the movie feel real, and the action looks compelling and believable. The effects sometimes have some failures in some animations, but all in all, it looks great, and really spooky.
Regarding the comedy, the main point is that the movie is not over-indulgent in its humor. Of course, Bill Murray is the funniest character in the movie, but he is restrained, and, although he's basically a meta-guy of sorts in midst of the ridiculousness of the plot, in the end he is really commited in the action, and gives an excellent performance. He is, of course, the fan-favorite character of the movie, but let's not forget all the rest of the cast, which makes this movie a memorable experience.
I think Ghostbusters is perhaps the best comedy of the 80s. I think to further describe it would be redundant. My recomendation is just watch it, and enjoy it.
10/10
The Village (2004)
Quite effective, but flawed.
The Village is a drama masquerading as a horror/suspense movie. The premise is simple: A village in mid XVIII century is being terrorized by supernatural agents that surround the village...
(spoilers)
... except that, of course not. At this time, we all know the drill. The whole thing really is set in modern times, when a group of people used some incredible contrived means to isolate themselves completely from the outside world. Indeed, it sound really forced, and somewhat ridiculous.
But, I think reducing the whole thing at a bad twist is making a disservice to the movie. When I watched The Village, the movie felt less like a horror movie, and more like a love and human drama. The relationship between Bryce Dallas Howard and Joaquin Phoenix is really well crafted in the movie, and it feels real, and even beautiful. When tragedy struck in the middle of the movie, I was worried less about the whole monster schtick, and more about the plight of the characters. Those were the moments that really carried the movie.
But alas, here comes the flaw of the movie. Being this an M. Night Shyamalan movie in midst 2000s, the movie couldn't just be a drama: it needed a "suspense" and "horror" theme, which is the weakest angle of the movie, and completely ruined by the "reveal" I mentioned, which makes everything regarding that angle, completely pointless. It's the same flaw that "Signs" has: a contrived and unbelievable plot device that belittles and ruins all the suspense.
But, I think this movie is superior to Signs, because although The Village plays with the suspense angle, it's far less accentuated than in Signs. I think the same resolution could have been kept, but making the movie less about the "mystery of the monsters" and more about the personal drama. I think the movie works in the end, but this flaw severly damages it.
6/10
Signs (2002)
How to ruin a good suspense film.
Signs is quite an effective suspense movie. The tone is ominous, the acting is reserved and it really creates a good ambiance, which makes the movie feels very intriguing. M. Night Shyamalan is a good director creating these types of environments, and I think, this is one of his best efforts.
(spoilers)
But, alas, the movie mysteries need to be resolved. And the resolution of all the interesting themes is just a ridiculous, forced and unconvincing Deus Ex Machina. Many have argued that the point of the movie is not "an alien invasion" but "a man struggling and recovering his faith". Fair enough, but even then, the resolution is completely forced. So, in the end, God caused (or allowed) the car accident that killed Mel Gibson's wife just for she to save their family in an alien invation, by giving some vague advice about telling Joaquin Phoenix to swing a bat on these guys?. Please, read again those last sentences. It is completely forced and ridiculous, and it completely kills the movie.
The thing is, this can be a good movie, as long as you don't think about it very much, and I think that's the reason it initally received good critiques. It's a thrilling ride, but the resolution makes everything to be pointless and ridiculous. Perhaps in some cases, it's the journey that counts, but in this case, the destination is just so forced and stupid, that it ruins everything.
In my opinion, this movie has value. It's interesting to watch, and it has some very tense and scary moments. It's just that the resolution of the plot is so, so poor, that it makes it all pointless in the end.
5/10
The Happening (2008)
Interesting ideas, but falls deep into a sea of ridicule.
The Happening is a more intelligent movie than it seems. The internet has made this movie into a collective punchline since its premiere in 2008, and deservedly. The tone is incoherent, the acting is numb, the dialog is a complete joke, etc. But, perhaps there is something more about this movie?.
(Spoilers)
The main theme in this movie is "the unknowable", and the hubris of thinking you know, when you really don't. The "plant toxin" idea is initially pitched by a weird random guy, but it's the only explanation Elliot has, so he keeps acting on it, just because he wants to know what is really happening, so he can save himself and his group. In the end, he fails miserably, almost all the people with him ends up dead, and he makes a fool of himself by talking to a plastic plant. The guy is a science teacher, and in the beginning of the movie, he says:
"Science will come up with some reason to put in the books, but in the end it'll be just a theory. I mean, we will fail to acknowledge that there are forces at work beyond our understanding. To be a scientist, you must have a respectful awe for the laws of nature."
This is the theme of the movie, and it's a fair point. Some things just can't be explained, M. Night thinks, and, if he wants to make a movie about that, good. In that way, it is a companion piece to "Signs". However, this concept is awfully executed. I think the main flaw is that it tried to be at the same time satire and horror, and that put the tone of the movie all over the place, becoming a ridiculous mess, which invites laughter at the movie, rather than reflection on the nature of the unknownable.
This movie is kind of a modern Zardoz: a satire lost in ridicule. Although this movie is far less enjoyable because, at least, Zardoz went all the way in its satire and is much bolder in its performance. The Happening is just fun for the memes and the ridicule associated with it, but aside from that it's just a tedious mess.
4/10
Solo: A Star Wars Story (2018)
A nice effort, but not enough to be a classic.
Solo: A Star Wars Story, is a fun thrill-ride, with good performances, nice vistas and, all in all good action and adventure for all the family. It's a competent movie, but it's still far below of what a Star Wars movie should be.
The good:
In general, we can describe this movie as "fine". Performances, story, effects and action scenes are fine. Nothing remarkable really (except Woody Harrelson's performance, the highlight of the movie), but nothing bad or mediocre. People complain about the "SJW droid", but come on guys, it's a clear joke at the expense of SJWs, and it is barely in the movie at all. Everything is slightly above average, and with all put together, it's a nice movie experience.
Regarding the "Star Wars Universe" stuff, this movie is remarkable in terms of actually exploring new angles of the Universe, instead of just maintaining the plot of "Empire vs Rebels", now the movie actually explore different aspects, stories and factions. It's not completely new, but it's a very welcomed change of focus.
The bad:
The movie has some pacing issues, making it feel undeveloped and rushed at times. Characters motivations and personalities are not well explored, and it doesn't feel well developed, and this is the main flaw of the movie.
In particular, regarding the last point, the character of Han Solo feels a little flat. He is "the young maverick", but aside for that, the character doesn't add much to what we know of Han Solo. I think his arc should have been going from idealistic to more cynical and rugged, but in the end, he's just a good and idealistic guy all along, and he really doesn't change much through the movie. It doesn't feel like a good character exploration, it feels like a lot of stuff happening to a pretty decent Han Solo cosplayer.
(SPOILERS) For example, at the end, he just ends up helping the rebels, because "it's the right thing to do", which is cool, if this character wasn't Han Solo, whom, at the beginning of ANH, was a rugged and cynical guy. Perhaps he changed later on, but then again, if that's the case, what's the point of making the movie about a "good guy" just being "a good guy". You can do that, if you want, but not in what should be a character-driven movie. I don't know, but it feels pointless at the end.
In the end, Solo is a good movie. Not great by any means, but good enough. I think it was harmed by coming to theaters too soon after the most controversial Star Wars movie ever, but I think it didn't deserve to flop so badly as it did.
7/10
Ghostbusters II (1989)
More a wasted opportunity than a bad movie by itself
Ghostbusters II is, all in all, a funny movie, with good jokes, good effects and decent acting. It's not bad by itself, but I think it pales by comparison with the original, and that's the main reason there's so much hatred for this movie.
The good: The main cast returns, the effects are improved. The performances are all fine, with some exceptions (Murray looks bored), but the jokes work all the same, and it's pretty funny. I loved Peter MacNicol's interpretation, completely, one of the highlights of the movie. If you enjoyed the first movie, you'll find the same witty humor and jokes. It's a fine comedy.
The bad: The plot is recycled, and nonsensical. The original movie worked so well, because it felt grounded in reality: a world similar to ours, but with ghosts. This movie exists in a strange universe in which everyone just forgot the first movie, which is a stupid plot contrivance just to recycle the first movie plot. The characters are basically in the same spot than at the beginning of the last movie, and finish the movie in exactly the same spot than at the end the last movie, with the Ghostbusters defeating a paranormal super-villain, and being hailed as heroes.
All the previous complaints are not enough to make this a bad movie, or a bad comedy. It just feels like a wasted opportunity to expand the story and the characters. In these respects, the movie feels rushed and lazy. But, I recommend you to see it with an open mind, and you'll have a good time with some laughs here and there.
7/10
Black Panther (2018)
Beautiful
This movie is a counterpoint to Thor: Ragnarok in the MCU. It's basically the same plot: a new king must secure his succession to the throne, and must fight challengers along the way. But when Thor is light and funny (and excellent in that regard), Black Panther is serious and surprisingly tragic. In each moment in this movie, the stakes are high, and the marvelous cinematography and incredible music are great to introduce us in the kingdom of Wakanda, and its magical ways and exotic costumes.
As a superhero movie, it's more deep, tragic and reflexive than usual. Really the characters are forced to face difficult questions, which the audience will find in a real moral dilemma to answer. This is not just the case of a stock villain trying to "take over whatever". There is a deep context in all the decisions the characters must face, and the movie is not trying to evade any of those questions.
Thor: Ragnarok was a celebration of fun and good times in a superhero movie. Black Panther was a reflexive introspection of the themes of supeheroes and violence. Both movies excelled in their settings, so both movies deserve the "really remarkable" score.
10/10
Thor: Ragnarok (2017)
This is what a superhero movie is all about!
Thor: Ragnarok is an incredible experience. Right from the start, you chuckle with all the gags and it's clear that the movie is playing itself for laughs for the most part. But, and this is the key factor in the movie, when things are serious, the movie is completely serious and poignant. This creates a consistent and really marvelous cinematic experience, and the best part, it's for all the family to see. As a really good superheroes movies really should be. Superheroes movies, at heart, are about fun, doing the right thing and having good times.
The movie has been lauded by all the critics and spectators, and really deserves all the praise. A movie experience completely recommended. Perhaps the finest effort so far in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and gives hope to continue in this trend, and I hope all the other "cinematic universes" take this lesson at heart: it's not about the shared story, it's about the characters, the adventure and, specially, the fun.
10/10, completely.
Justice League (2017)
What a mess
Justice League is a movie with a serious identity crisis. The movie is not sure about what it is, and goes all around the place. It has good moments and some good one-liners, but all in all, is a garbled mess of different tones, plots and characters which aren't developed, and gets really annoying at times. Batman v Superman was also a mess, but at least it was consistent with itself. This goes all over the place.
The good: Supes' return. It was emotional and powerful. He stole the movie, and the interpretation by Cavill is really, really good. It felt more like Superman than any other movie.
The bad: It's rushed beyond belief. Too many characters, not enough time to develop them. The main antagonist was the most affected by this.
Sorry to say, but this movie is not that good. It's not bad either. It's just mediocre.
5/10
Star Wars: Episode VIII - The Last Jedi (2017)
An all around good movie, but harmed by some irrelevant sillyness, and endless hype.
Star Wars, Episode VIII is, all in all, an entertaining adventure, with good action, good performances, but somewhat tainted by some silly scenes and concepts. But, in general, emotionally, it's a movie that works creating interesting relationships between characters (at last, credible sexual tension in Star Wars since 1983!), good landscapes and action scenes, and went to places Star Wars never had gone before, such as the theme of "dealing with failure". Yes, it was present in ESB, but in this movie is more developed, perhaps not in a subtle way, but it's not a common theme in adventures.
But, it's a flawed movie, and that's undeniable. There's a lot of silly scenes, the humor is sometimes out of place (but it's not as overblown as it has been said), and there are some plot holes which makes the movie a lot more silly than it should be. For me, the worst mistake was, why the Purple Hair Lady didn't told Poe the plan from the very beginning?. There was no reason for she doing otherwise, and that lead to the subplot of Poe-Rose-Finn which is one of the most divisive points of the movie. I think these concepts should have been fixed, but, all in all, it's just minor errors, and don't detract from the emotional core of the movie, which is the relationship between Rey and Kylo, which was tense and it felt real, deep and complicated.
So, this is a fine movie, with some minor issues, but it's good fun, which is, in my opinion, the heart of Star Wars: good adventures and escapist fun... so, what's the deal with the vitriolic reaction is receiving?
In that respect, this movie is a clear example of an over-hyped product which ends being harmed by all the hype, which, in this movie was centered around all the mysteries created by TFA, such as: "Rey's mysterious origin story, what's her relationship with Luke, who is Snoke", etc. etc. ad nauseam. And it was like in a roulette, the ball fell in 00. Everyone loses: Rey's fathers are just nobodies, she has no relationship with Luke, Snoke turns out to be completely irrelevant, etc. So, in terms of fan expectations, this movie dared to subvert everyone's expectations. That's dangerous, but also, it's bold, and I have to respect the director for daring to take such a choice. But, I think a lot of the attacks this movie is receiving are a reaction of a hyped fandom, not a fair analysis done by taking the movie for what it is: a silly and fun space adventure for all the family to enjoy.
So, I think, it's an all around good movie, and I think it's unfair to say it's bad just because it dared to to subvert expectations. It's not good for that, either, but I think there are enough merits for considering this movie a really good one.
8/10
Ghostbusters (2016)
A silly, but ultimately harmless movie.
I watched this movie one year after the huge controversy it caused by the mere reason of existing, and I was afraid to watch it, expecting something terrible. And in the end, it's just a silly comedy, completely forgettable. This is not a very funny movie, in fact, most of the jokes fell flat (with some remarkable exceptions), but, all in all it's a "nice" movie. The characters felt nice, funny and sympathetic, and it felt like a genuine (but forced) attempt to produce something funny. But, the improvisational style of humor of Paul Feig wasn't good for the whole "Ghostbusters" concept. The original movie was snarky and the premise is absurd, but the characters felt real, with real motivations. In this one, the characters (although nice) felt like cartoon characters improvising lame puns and references to other movies. So, the movie is filled with long and overbearing jokes which may turn it in a bore for many people. For me, it wasn't such a terrible experience, and I was surprised to enjoy it at many moments. But in the end, is completely underwhelming as a movie, and the most memorable thing about it will probably be the huge and absurd controversy created around it.
6/10
The Cabin in the Woods (2011)
At last, an intelligent deconstrucion of the slasher movie
After years and years of repeating the same old tropes (and playing with them such as in Scream), at last, a perfect deconstruction of the tired and boring clichés that plague this genre.
(HUGE SPOILERS NEXT) The point of the movie is "these stories are played this way to satisfy gods", which gods?, the horror movie audience, of course!. They are the torture porn addict gods, and reading some comments here about how this movie "isn't scary" shows how good this movie hits on the mark. Slasher flicks plots are just as pointless and repetitive as the ritual sacrifices in the movie, and if they are not played just straight as the audiences want, they got angry and "destroy" the movie. (END OF SPOILERS)
But, in any case, aside from any pedantic deep reading, if you take this movie just for what it is, then it's just a silly comedy, and funny as hell. It has excellent moments, jokes, and some scary jumpy stuff from time to time. Just don't expect a normal "slasher flick", but a "very dark comedy" and you'll enjoy it.
10/10
Beowulf (2007)
I'm not a fan of CGI movies, but...
... this one worked for me. Yeah, it's CGI, and yeah, it's lame, and the comparisons between the action scenes and a "videogame cut-scenes" are common in this cases. But, alas, in this case I wouldn't go so far about it. Why?, because it's a really good story, with classic characters, with interesting twists on the original story of Beowulf, and, in the end, I felt it worked.
Here's the thing: when you watch a cartoon movie, also feels fake, because you can always say: "it's just a bunch of cartoons". But are many animated movies which are classics, because of the characters, the story and the feeling it delivers. CGI movies are not classic animation, in the sense that is trying to imitate real environments. It's good?, in general, I would say it isn't good, because, most of the times, it feels like an attempt to give "eye candy" to the audience, rather than tell a good and interesting story (said... Star Wars prequels?). But the story of Beowulf is so classic, and good, it overcomes these problems, and at times, I almost forgot I was watching a bunch of pixels, and rather, a good adventure movie.
Recommended: Check it out.
8/10
Ngo si seoi (1998)
This is what Jackie Chan is all about!
Great movie by Jackie Chan. He's really one of the greatest martial artists of all time, and in this movie, he also shows his skills as actor, director, comedian, and stunt coordinator, in this amazing movie.
The plot is lame, of course, but, what are you expecting?. It just a martial arts movie!. And the word "amazing" is short to describe the incredible stunts performed by Jackie. It's incredible, this is one of his late movies, but the man delivers as good as ever.
The only thing that I didn't care about this movie was the resolution of the plot. I found the ending sequence pretty lame. But the rest is just Jackie delivering as good as ever, with good action, breath-taking sequences and a lot of laughs. Go check it out!
9/10
2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)
Greatest movie ever.
This movie is perfect. Absolutely perfect. It's the closest I can think to a "cinematic experience". Yeah, in other movies, you're watching the action, in this movie, you are almost experiencing the action, the tension, the odyssey... it's amazing.
The story is a mystery plot, in which the viewer has to figure out, along with the characters, what is going on, in midst of a chilling space adventure, in which the characters face a relentless force lurking them... it's incredible. I won't dare spoil anything to anyone, so, go check it out. This movie is the prime example of "show, don't tell". It's the most amazing visual experience you'll ever had. I watch it regularly, and the visual effect never get old. Why?, because the experience and the story are so well crafted, it makes the effects amazing every time, not like other movies (as Matrix) where the effects get old after the second view. There are deep questions, deep motifs, and a mysterious and epic finish... it's breath taking.
When I think a movie works for me, I give it a 10 score. I wish I could give it more to this masterpiece. The finest hour of the genius of Stanley Kubrick.
11/10
Anger Management (2003)
A rather typical comedy, but well done
Anger Management is a typical comedy from the beginning of the 2000. I don't remember if by that time, already had begun the "blah blah movie" which has destroyed USA comedy, but this one is rather witty and funny. And it has Jack Nicholson in it.
This movie is the story of a "yes-dude" with a dull job, a pretty girlfriend, who goes to Anger Management therapy with a rather unusual therapist. Yeah, it's a setup arch-repeated in comedies, but it's so unpretentious, at the same time, it works perfectly, for being just a movie for cheap laughs, and some NYY-Giuliani shameful promotion. It's hard to find this wittiness now-a-days in comedies, and Sandler-Nicholson make a great comedic couple. And also John Turturro is there. What else you need?.
Completely recommended.
8/10
Zardoz (1974)
Interesting story, fine premise... but sunk in midst of its own silliness
There's fine line which marks when a parody stops being funny, and becomes downright silly. Zardoz it's deeply submerged in that fuzzy realm. I think it's hard to believe anyone, while watching this movie, wouldn't crack laughing at the silly costumes, silly scenes, silly attitudes, etc. and it's a shame, because this movie has an interesting plot, character, devices, and a profound message. There are so many levels of parody here, it's incredible: religion, progress, class warfare, hippie subculture fantasies, etc. But, alas, the audience is distracted from this by having Sean Connery almost naked during the whole movie. First, he's wearing a trikini, then he's on a speedo... and then he's dressed as a bride!: I swear I laughed ten minutes straight after watching that scene. But, for the rest of the review, I'll try to ignore all the silly stuff, such as hippies admiring Sean Connery having an erection (oh boy).
The premise of the movie is just excellent: it's an interesting mix between utopian and dystopian fantasies, which sets up a mystery: Who is Zed?, who are the immortals?, why are they here?, what is the tabernacle?, who was Arthur Frayn, Zardoz, the puppet-master of all this stuff?. Those are fair mysteries, and the resolution is both satisfactory and shocking. (SPOILERS), the massacre scene at the end it's incredibly effective.
But, then again, we come to the silliness. It needs to be said in capital letter: THE ACTING IN THE MOVIE IS SO OVER THE TOP. It's incredible: they range between catatonic, screaming, horny... all this makes the acting looks fake, even with the best efforts of the cast. The scenes are surreal, but the special effects haven't aged well, I suppose.
In the end, it's a prime example of how an excellent story can be somewhat lost in a sea of silliness. It's like having a clown reciting Hamlet: It COULD work, but it's a stretch, and it needs careful handing, which Boorman, sadly, didn't have this time.
7/10
Star Trek (2009)
Reboot successful
At last, after more of ten years, a DECENT Star Trek movie. The "TNG" ones were pretty lame, and the "TOS" ones were a mixed bag. Then, we came to this one, which, by Sci-Fi-Fantasy standards, it's pretty good!.
Of course, the main criticisms of this movie will come from Trek fanboys, angry because "they raped our beloved characters" or comments such as these. Nonsense. By prequels standards, this movie is a respectful and well crafted nod to a cheesy TV series of the 60s. And, yeah, the "timeline erase" issue. All I can say is: if this movie has saved the Star Trek Universe of movies such as The Final Frontier, Generations and Nemesis, then, deserves praise just for that.
The main problem I found in this movie, is that some plot devices just defy all credibility. (SPOILERS!) So, Kirk lands in some ice planet, ejected by stupid Spock, only to find elder Spock (good to see you, Mr. Nimoy) just a couple miles around, who coincidently has the explanation about the plot. Oh, and Scotty is around there also. That's convenient. And there's more of these.
But aside that, the story is just fine. The acting is intense and excellent, the effects are good, the tone is adventurous, and, overall, it's a good cinematic experience. Check it out.
9/10
THX 1138 (1971)
Impressive... most impressive.
Many people forget that George Lucas, years before he became the "Blockbuster dude" with his "fantasy stories", he considered himself an abstract filmmaker, more interested in visuals and concepts, rather than storytelling (which is why he has manifested so low levels of that in the Star Wars Prequels). But, in this sci-fi flick, he's at his prime in terms of visual exuberance.
The movie is the usual "dystopic story" of hero finding out he lives in a dictatorship, he rebels, blah, blah. Been there, seen that. The interesting here is the setting, the characters and the visual effects, which are amazing. The acting is great, the effects are amazing, the setting is chilling, and the story goes jumping across with ups, downs, adventure, drama, an exciting chase, ending in one of the most iconic movie images I can recall: I watched this movie when I was 8 years old, and the I watched again a couple of weeks ago, and it's incredible. Of images such as these, movie history is written.
It's a shame George Lucas, after the admittedly excellent Star Wars Trilogy didn't return to make films such as this, instead of making boring and lame films "for kids". Alas, but in any case, this one is one of his lest known gems. Perfect score for Mr. Lucas this time.
10/10
Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead (1990)
This IS intelligent entertainment
Sadly, I haven't seen the original play of "R&G are Dead". Sadly, because if it's any good as this movie is, then surely it's a masterpiece. This is "Absurd Theater" at its best: I find it a better premise than "Waiting for Godot", which is just, two guys waiting for something which is not clear. In this case, the characters are lost in midst of a play we all know what it is about, so, the mood is more tongue-in-cheek: the feel is much more Kafkaesque this time, when the invisible strings lead these characters to their demises, and also, it's incredible fun and witty.
As a film, the only issue I can think of is sometimes the action moves rather slowly, but I think that was the idea: a surreal and dream like state, in which the characters are constantly in doubt. The scenarios, scenes, script, etc. are just brilliant.
About the performances, there is really not much to say except: excellent. Roth, Oldman and Dreyfus are brilliant in their roles, and A+ performance.
Perfect score for one of my favorite movies of all time.
10/10
Mortal Kombat: Annihilation (1997)
My eyes!
I watched this movie, long ago, when I was young, and expecting the sequel of "Mortal Kombat". Of course, MK1 was nothing special, but it had its moments, and it was fun enough to expect at least for another dumb action movie in the sequel... but then, we got this movie. I was fifteen years old at the time, and I didn't know anything about cinema, but my thought was: "This is the worst movie of all time". After twelve years, I'm not sure if it is really the worst movie ever, but it's pushing really hard to make it.
This movie is shameful. The replacements for the actors of the first movie are embarrassing, the acting is a mess, and the movie loses all the tongue-in-cheek tone of the first one, so, its plot devices which used to be stupid, but funny, are now just stupid.
Of course, the "target audience" for this piece of junk was the average Mortal Kombat gamer, so all this movie does is just throwing all the characters possible, so we can all say: "Look, it's Kitana!", "Look, it's Cyrax!", "Look, it's Baraka... I guess, it looks awful", "Look, it's Shao Khan... oh, man, he's so lame".
Do yourself a favor, and avoid this train wreck at all costs. The only value of this movie is serving as a torture device, or as a device for a drinking game based on pointing out the stupid things in the movie and drinking a shot, which in about fifteen minutes will end up in everyone being dead drunk.
1/10
Mortal Kombat (1995)
A kung fu movie based on a game which is based on kung fu movies...
Yeah, it's a stretch, but in "videogame movie" standards, this one is pretty decent... which is not saying much, but, who cares?. Just check your brain outside the cinema (or your bedroom/living room/etc.), and go for a ride.
This movie follows the plot of the first "Mortal Kombat" game, which was pretty lame to begin with, so, this movie is also pretty lame. But at least is not pretentious: it's stupid, and the movie is proud of the fact. The performances feel tongue-in-cheek, so it's not as annoying as the common "videogame" movie...
... but yeah, it's predictable, cliché and stupid. It's the best movie based on videogames, but, as a movie, it's just an outdated and corny Kung Fu movie, without much enduring value, except it's based on a memorable game. That's it.
5/10
Casanova (2005)
Nice performance by Ledger, but it's too Disney
The story of Casanova is the tale of one of the greatest lovers of all time. It should be a story of sensuality, passion, intrigue... but, alas, when it becomes Disney, all we get is just another sappy romantic comedy, but a funny one, at least.
The story is the typical fiasco of "the lover who finds his true love", but well told, funny-paced and with good acting. Of course, during the course of the movie, the clichés mount almost embarrassingly, one over the top of the next one: "The feminist ahead of her time", "the fat comic relief", "the young apprentice", etc. But, at the same time, it's so recognizable and light-hearted, that all the flaws are forgiven, and then we just can sit and enjoy this silly and lovely story, in midst of impressive scenarios.
The acting is good. Ledger is good in this one, showing skill to perform the enigmatic Casanova, and the rest of the actors are decent enough to makes us enjoy this Venetian holiday.
In conclusion?, not a boring movie, but nothing special. It's just an enjoyable and lovely experience.
7/10
Camp Nowhere (1994)
One of the funniest "summer-camp" movies of the 90s
Yeah, it's just a silly movie for kids, but "Camp Nowhere" hits right in the mark: the story is engaging enough to keep us watching, the characters are adorable, it has Christopher Lloyd in it and the jokes and slapstick are fun enough to keep us entertained the whole thing. Yes, this is not as smart as "Addams' Family Values", but for what it is, is a enjoyable ride.
The highlight of this movie, as I've said, is Christopher Lloyd: he's a great and funny actor, and here he shows his comedic talents in all its glory, with his multiple performance.
Good and funny summer movie, take it for what it is; a kids' film.
7/10