Change Your Image
rottninge
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Synchronicity (2015)
It hit me right on the sweet spot!
Well, first, I was clearly biased when I watched this. This movie just happened to perfectly fit the location, mood, and life situation I was in at the time when I saw it.
Nevertheless, I actually consider this movie to be more of a cinematographic state of mind more then a story line. And I think it's a success.
The imagery, camera work, and the music, clearly pays its dues to movies such as Blade Runner and TRON: Legacy. I even believe (haven't checked it up though) the story takes place in the same universe as Blade Runner.
I also found it to be well casted, smart, and well acted. I'm guessing it's made on a very limited budget but I think the money was very well spent. The CGI aren't in your face and I even found it hard to spot when it was actually used. That is possibly due to very wise choice of locations - we see many fastidious futuristic building buildings (the whole story takes place within dense urban areas) and concrete jungles.
I found the music to be extremely fitting and after the end credits I directly started looking up the composer(s) of the motion picture soundtrack (Lovett), as well as the songs played during the end credits (Watch It - Space Art, Over the bridge - Ori Vidislavski, Mama - Ghostland Observatory, and Time Travel - Ben Lovett)
The only negative I have to say about it is that I anted a bit more background and introduction to the min character (but now I'm really picky) and I think the atmosphere of the movie was lost right at the beginning of the end credits during the intro of the song "Watch It" by Space Art (bu, again, being picky here)
So, for me:
In the right mood, 9/10 Any given day, 7/10
Southland Tales (2006)
A difficult film with prerequisites
Many comments made in response to those that couldn't understand what was going on in this film is suggesting to read the graphic novels. I'm of the opinion that a film should be a stand-alone piece of work.
The only impression I got from this movie is that it portrays a over the top taste how the world might look in 20 years from now when the millennials and those born in the 90s are in charge. But, heck, I don't know... Who am I to judge?
Many call it an under-rated film. I work a lot with statistics and as the rating is a mean (or the median) of all votes, the ones claiming it to be under-rated belong to a smaller, underrepresented sub group. Sorry guys, but it is correctly rated.
Red Dawn (2012)
The anti-thesis protagonist opinion!
I have noticed (it's not hard) that this movie is getting thrashed for being so much worse than the 1984 original. It seems like a lot of reviewers might grew up with the Dirty Dancing casted 1984 version. I had never seen the 1984 or the 2012 versions but did so yesterday (2012 version) and today (1984 original).
First, the 1984 release has a 6,3 and the 2012 remake has a 5.4 rating. That's not a huge difference.
Josh Peck has received a massive amount of hate for his performance. Yes, the casting of him is weird and his performance is not solid, but I can remind you that good acting was not overrepresented in the 1984 version either. No, Josh Peck doesn't look like a brother to Chris Hemsworth but does Charlie Sheen look like a brother of Patrick Swayze?
The new film gets criticism for unrealistic warfare tactics (and outcomes)... But I couldn't really find less of it in the old original...
So here's what I did. I had a bad day and needed something where I don't have to think too much, I get into my 12-year old mode and enjoy the ride (People! It's a bunch of kids killing hundreds of trained soldiers that has superior fire power, one has do dumb down first!). It worked, and was a prerequisite for BOTH versions.
The Subjects (2015)
Quick turns between crap and good fun
There's some fun dialogue at times. There's an interesting idea. Good casting. The basic story is, conceptually, good.
But the problem I had watching it was that I was thrown every 30 seconds between hating the script and all illogical stuff, and getting back to that it was actually quite fun and entertaining.
There's plenty of illogical stuff going on in this movie, and in that I don't even include the stuff that were meant to be illogical, or the sci-fi element.
I think my problem with The Subjects boils down to that this movie could have been good if it had focused more on one of the genres/themes it contained: comedy, a group of people stuck together, superpowers, or the clinical trial experiment. Choose one and tone the other three down. But now, the comedy comes sporadically, the group of people stuck together had to be compressed in between everything else that went down, the superpowers were too over the top, and the clinical trial was just a means for transportation to get to the scenario set up (from a scientific standpoint it was cringe worthy).
I switched back and fourth between enjoying The Subjects and finding it ridiculous.
Today I gave it 4/6 Any other day I could have given it a 6/10 depending on the mood
She's Funny That Way (2014)
Missing something
Good casting. Overall not bad performances. Nothing wrong with the settings, the editing, or the camera-work. But something is missing and I can't put my finger on it...
One thing that irritated me was the music. It just didn't seem to fit. It felt more Italian/French than Broadway.
I felt like the story had one leg in the typical Hollywood comedy, and one leg in the more dialogue driven Woody Allen type movies, and that it couldn't decide. It also had some strands of British Mr Bean-/Benny Hillisch humor that really felt out of place. The scenes could have been better worked through in my opinion. They felt half baked. I guess the reason I can't put the finger on what I didn't like is because there's not one major thing that is wrong, but rather several small things that add up to my feeling.
If you tell me this is a remake of some French movie I will believe you right away. The original was probably better.
Sniper: Legacy (2014)
More entertaining if you sit it through!
I got the honor to watch Sniper: Legacy on the 4327th movie-sitting festival on my grand old couch, alone, before bedtime. (I never understood why it is important to give information on that but anyway...)
This has a less serious tone than the previous Sniper movies. I didn't really get it at first but, boy, did I get it during the last 5 minutes. I then understood why many characters were extra stereotypical, where the (sort of) college movie vibes between the younger characters came from, and the more Rambo-ish shoot-outs and 80-ies man-to-man combat scenes came from. If you see it, don't get fooled by the thriller elements in the opening. That is not what it is if you ask me.
Actually, I gave it a good five-out-of-ten while watching it. I let the quite frequent factual errors pass because I thought early on that the writers/director/producers probably weren't going for authentic fire-fights. BUT! Then comes the last five minutes and, BOOM, I have to rate it a seven. There's a big risk that many will hate those five minutes. It's like the end is made in that way to let you choose: It explains the rest of the creation, or, it spoils however you felt about the movie up until then.
Good casting, decent script, directing seems in place, acting is efficient.
That's my take on it. Good night!
Late Phases (2014)
Surprising drama dressed as a B slasher
The lead, played by Nick Damici, is what drives this movie. It's sort of a B movie slasher and drama hybrid with fantastic short but effective dialog on the verge of actionish one liners, but that stays within the realistic realm. Good casting and a straight ahead story. The slasher aspect is the meat and potatoes of the movie, the lead character is what makes it stand out. Yes, the SFX are B-grade, but I strongly believe they were never meant to be anything else. There's humor as well. Subtle for the genre, but it's there, and I think the subtleness add to the movie. There are also references to other classics in the genre, which is nice. I truly enjoyed it!
The Hunger Games (2012)
Y'all over 18! You agree on severe over-rating? (SPOILERS)
Spoiler alert! From someone who have not read the books. Relevant: I'm 37, love movies, and consume them en masse.
I have avoided this series for years but now a good friend really wanted us to see the series so I took one for the team. Of course I realized the target audience has an average age of about 13,2 years. But not even that notion could save me. I've seen the Harry Potters and the Twilight Sagas and such, and I think I managed to put on a "teen filter" and could appreciate those products for what they were. But this. This is something else... What I thought of the characters? Were there characters in this movie? I only saw faces that spoke. I think some of them died. I'm not certain because nothing in this movie evoked any feelings in me except all over-the-top illogical things that made me doubt myself, thinking, "That was so stupid I must be seeing things! I probably missed something here so I better shut up, because what just happened was so stupid it couldn't have happened". The only "character" I could see on screen was delivered by Stanley Tucci. The Effie character had glimpses of actually being something of a person you could connect anything at all to. I actually think Mr Sutherland performed well (as always) but the movie just pooped on his performance, smothering it completely. The same goes for Mr Harrelson. Mr Kravitz!!?? No comment. Love his music though.
The whole art design and atmosphere had some sort of TV- production/documentary touch I couldn't really grasp. I guess I feel like it was presented to me like by a five year old presenting his/her drawings: "Here is the poor, here is the rich, here is a forest, here is the city, here's a police man, here comes another one". Jennifer Lawrence, Jennifer Lawrence, Jennifer Lawrence. She may be a lot of things, but she's NOT on fire in this movie (or the next one). This role is just not coming out right. Maybee it's even so that it's not in her pocket to play this kind of roles...
All stupidities that happened... Well I haven't read the book. Maybee it's all explained there. But it's not a pre-requisite to have read the book. There are so many things... But the major ones: It's never really explained how this gory TV-show is to hold a whole nation under control. Yes, they explain it by talking of fear and hope of different degrees and how to manipulate it and maintain control. But they fail to create a feeling of the situation and why this TV-show is needed. What's confusing is when you see the resources the upper class and government have, in the form of superior forces, technology and food and energy. Teaming up in a sole-survivor-kill-em-all competition is a good idea all of a sudden? This isn't some reality TV-show... you kill one and other here... I understand that the ones that doesn't want to murder team up by instinct. But the trained killers - why would they ever want to stay within proximity of the other trained killers??? Dog- monsters (this is actually part of the "superior resources" point) that are created out of thin air, becomes solid creatures that can tear humans apart. Isn't this a more efficient way to control the poor labour in the outer districts than some TV-show?
Final point is on the subject of how to point with a bow and arrow... I had to Google her technique because I got a funny feeling every time she was aiming at something. Modern bows with all the tech-stuff on them, you hold the way she does. With traditional ones, like the one in THG, you need to have the end of the arrow further up, closer to the eye, because the only thing to aim with is the arrow... Silly detail really. But if you ask me I say it's such a central detail it's mandatory to get right.
Whisper (2007)
Good for some, but for most, not
Good casting. Probably a low budget but that doesn't show too much and didn't bother me. Decent acting. Script OK too, well in draft at least I guess. So what went wrong? IMO simply a lame story. If you know both your classics, and newer decent horror/mystery too, you will recognize just about everything. The biggest question I have is - what was the return of interest? If this movie paid dividends I applaud the producers.
If you're younger than 12, or (sort-of-a-SPOILER-if-you-miss-the-intro- biblical-quote-in-the-movie) a biblical literalist, you will get the chills and enjoy this. I just know that I didn't.