Reviews

4 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Gone Girl (2014)
8/10
Just great
15 October 2014
Maybe I'm overreacting but I really mean it. This movie was great in every way possible. Usually when people talk about this movie they go on about the plot of the story and even though it came as a surprise, there are other ways of talking about this movie.

First half is pretty basic story vise, main character finds his home violated and his wife missing. In that first half we get two view points, view-point of main protagonist Nick and the detective investigating this case. So as the detective is going deeper into the case, reading chapters from missing Amy's journal, we start suspecting Nick more and more but one can easily see that something is wrong about that picture which is presented to us. And that's as much of the plot that you're gonna get from me.

Everyone was doing his/hers job perfectly, not attracting attention to their work. The score by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross was perfect, for most of the running time i didn't really notice it that much, you'd notice it at just the right moments for just the good amount. Where a lot of people would try to use music to manipulate your mood. This was atmospheric at just the right amount.

Camera movement/angles are perfect, again a lot of people try to be showoffy with the camera moves/long takes/weird angles, but here everything serves only a story telling purpose. Like most of Finchers films, you could turn off the audio and still get what is going on because it's perfectly orchestrated. Also, the color palate is very fitting given the overall theme of the movie.

Performances range from good to GREAT.

Ben Affleck has been in some really good movies over the years but his acting chops were never exceptional. Here he shines like never before, and maybe it's because the role just fits him personally. For good amount of the time he plays a man who's imploding, with only few bursts of anger. Even though we, the audiences, were manipulated to hate him in the first half I kind of liked the guy, but will be the first one to say that he's an A-hole. A lot of people didn't like him but to me he's just your normal guy who you can find in your neighborhood. Given the overall them of the movie I'd say that pretty much all of his actions are right fitting and that most of the people judging him would probably act the same way (since I don't want to go into spoilers, I will leave it at this).

Rosamund Pike is THE STAR of this film, giving the performance of her career and I would be disappointed if there isn't a lot of Oscar buzz around it (but I also wouldn't be surprised if they ignore it because the Academy was never about honoring the very best). A lot of people are judging her character and her motivations for some of her choices but one thing that people tend to forget is that movies are not the exact representation of life,they're the illusion of reality. And also, we're taking about a sick mind that doesn't have a real 'I' because all of the media scrutiny she was exposed to. So her perception of morally right and wrong is different from everyone else's. But I can get people not buying into character motivations.

This is going over the edge and then some in sole purpose of making us learn something about our selves, in this case about how we're only mammals who are for majority of the time just an echo... How we're all putting on masks of what we find is the perfect self, and what happens when you get into route and start taking things for granted... But also giving a great commentary on mass media and again proving the point that people as a mass group are stupid, panicky animals. Given this theme the movies ending and choices characters made are perfectly fitting and is only logical. I haven't read the book, and I don't really want to because this did the job for me and the author wrote the screenplay so I know it's what was intended in the first place.

It's also worth noting Neil Patrick Harris's and Tyler Perry's performances too, but I wouldn't say they're anything other than good.

If there is a misstep it's that only after the twist happened, the detective started raising some questions as far as the Nick's innocence or the lack of it, there was no indication of it before. But she was judgmental from the very beginning about everything so I'll let it slide.

And in one of the sex scenes, which was very disturbing to say the least, penetration happened while Pike still had he underwear on... And yet few scenes later we get a way more exposing shoot of her in the bathtub. This movie was obviously not interested in censoring stuff so why? I guess MPAA would've slapped it with an NC-17, so I guess this is for the better, I was surprised to get this much into just an R and be so commercial. I'm loving that Fincher is getting this much attention and that a quality film making is third week at the top of the box office figures. Go see it, now!
4 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
The Bourne Identity meets Oldboy type of ripoff gone bad
7 June 2014
Warning: Spoilers
This is just a disjointed mess of a movie, it's this bad type of story telling that is like 'connecting the dots'... Like they wrote on paper list of plot points they would like to have in the movie and then wrote some story to join it together. At first it starts as Bourne Identity/Leon ripoff, then it goes into classic revenge tale of a cop who's child was a drug victim, so he joins main protagonist to hunt criminal mastermind using unusual methods... And then it goes for the Memento/Oldboy kind of third act with a huge twist that will leave you in awe (sarcasm sign)... This movie steals from all over the place... Not to say that you can't make a good movie sticking to genre conventions, Tarantino made a career for himself by referencing and ripping off other people... But usually it's expected that you throw some of your own touches into the mix, and it also doesn't hurt to be little self aware. This movie takes it self way too seriously! So seriously that by the third act it's laughably bad.

But maybe it's not fair to label it as a bad movie just because it steals every psychological thriller ever made, so let's deconstruct it's level of badness. Execution is really bad... And don't say how i'm nitpicking, because if you have the money to get all of those locations equipment etc. It wouldn't hurt if you knew how to choreographed and shoot action. Other than that one shitty scene where Nikola Kojo breaks this one guys nose (they would cut after every punch to a same shot, only different take... why, only god knows), there isn't that may opportunities to show how bad at it they actually are at it but the last big showdown shitty as hell in those terms. From continuity errors to errors of logical kind... Nikola Kojo is trying to give it his best, and he is... He's trying to give some sort of depth to a shallow character but he is just plain overacting. And really, are you gonna cast Dragan Petrovic in that role, by the minute you see him on the screen you know that something's not right with him... it's his typical role... Jut like Nikola Kojo is here in his almost typical role... Maja Karan plays only one role ever, she's always the same and it's no exception here. Almost everyone is playing their typical character here, everything about this movie says that it's a movie made by committee. it's really a shame that in Serbia only small group of people get to decide on that projects should money be spent and that they always give it to the untalented people with no vision or artistic expression. Cinemas today are filled with movies that feel like they have been made by a machine that's just trimming out same product one after another... How good is that product is equivalent to the taste of a cake you by in a supermarket...Tasteless... And this one is like it too, only this one feels like it's been made by a in development version of that machine... Go watch any of the movies I mentioned above, I wouldn't say that those movies are masterpieces but at least they're not pretending they're something they're not. This movie begs you to associate it with modern Hollywood type of action thrillers, and I'm not buying it.
6 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Death Proof (2007)
6/10
Fun throwback to the 70s exploitation
15 May 2014
The thing about Tarantino is that it has become a trend that he makes movies for the sole purpose of them being 'cool'. I'm not really complaining since I love the living sh*t out of every single one of them, but it also kind of bugs me that someone with huge talent would just kind of repeat him self. Not in the real sense, he is always working in a different genera or sub-genera of movies (it's more sub- genera's he's interested in), but it always comes down to him just inserting Roger Corman-isms in his movies (in a sense of him exploiting everything, out of this world movie violence... you can tell when it's him by those things). I have no problem with that, I love each and every one of his flicks (yes, even Four Rooms... I LOVE IT), Pulp Fiction, Reservoir dogs and Kill Bill i would say are some of my favorite movies in like EVER! But this kind of film-making kind of makes it immune to criticism. And that's most apparent here. I mean, every problem that one can possibly have with this movie is intentional because it's an homage to 70s B-movies that Rodriguez and Tarantino grew up on and love. No problem with that, Spielberg and Lucas made their careers out of combining shi**y television they grew up on in the 50s and film classics they got introduced to later on, and it worked. One thing that should be noted is that this movie was a part of a double feature, and Death proof is Tarantino's cut of that segment. So I don't really know about everyone else but it was in my opinion way too long (one thing that i liked about directors cut is that lap dance which was cut out of Grindhouse... don't judge me, it's exploitation, that's what it's for). As far as the story and structure go, i would say that if Psycho and Escape from New York had a baby, it would be Death Proof. And i don't like Psycho all that much. First half of the movie got me really invested, but then right at the middle we get 'Psycho-like' explanation of exposition and what just happen, we get a character explaining how we should interpret it and 'explains' how Stuntman Mike's mind works... And after that story just repeats in self. Then the movie lost me. I love how in movies like Phantom of Liberty you change your perspectives and main characters (only thing i liked in Psycho) but here it just didn't work for me. But bunch of people loved it, so it's really subjective. just because something is an homage or intentional doesn't make it immune to criticism and doesn't mean it's great out of the bat. But, like I said, I don't hate a single one of his movies... And this one i no exception, even though I wasn't that much invested into the second half, You still have some great characters and some great Tarantino dialog's. And bunch of chicks kicking some major ass. I can't help but think that if it was more cheesy (like Planet Terror was, that movie threw all the logic out of the window and it worked... it was funny as hell and i enjoyed it) i would have love it more, it is what it is. If only Tarantino was to move on from this trend of making movies, PTA started out similarly but he moved on to direct some great stuff. Jackie Brown was a really serious film with great characters (characters in that one are probably the best he had filmed because fist half of the movies is just you hanging out with them, getting to know them...) and Inglorious Basterds opening chapter was a great suspense ride (wish the rest of the movie was like that, but it went strait to exploitation again, until it got to be this really interesting 'love story' for a few minutes and then went to something that was clash of all of those... would love to see all of those movies separately but Inglorious Basterds will do).
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Extremely fun to watch...!
1 January 2014
I will try to say as little as possible about the plot and let you enjoy on your own. Story is set in year 1978. On the beginning of the picture we're introduced to out of shape but charismatic Irving Rosenfeld (played by Christian Bale), Sydney Prosser and her British accent (played by Amy Adams) and FBI agent Richie DiMaso (played by Bradley Cooper). Irving and Sydney are hustlers who... well, hustle to survive. But after a chain of events they end up being forced to help out FBI. How and why you will have to see for your self.

Other notable characters are Irving's wife; Rosalyn Rosenfeld (played by Jennifer Lawrence) and Mayor Carmine Polito.

I gotta say, this movie is extremely fun, really good and natural dialogues, interesting characters, great performances (everyone brought their A-Game to the table), some really good camera angles that serve the story... I can go on but i think i should stop now. It has this Scorsese/early PTA feel to it, you can pot quite a few homages to Goodfellas and Casino in this one. Some may even say that this one succeeded at being more Scorsese than Scorseses The Wolf of Wall Street, movie surrounded by a lot of controversy but is in my opinion better than kind of overrated American Hustle. Like a lot of movies it is influenced by, it is also very character driven and less plot driven, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't have good plot with really good resolution. To some it may seem like it's unfocused at times, but to me it didn't matter because each and every character is a delight to watch on screen. All the actors had great chemistry with each other, especially Christian Bale and Amy Adams. And, don't let them fool you, this movie IS NOT A COMEDY! It's a great crime drama with some funny moments in it. Check this one out.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed