Reviews

Sinister is one of those movies that received a lot of negative reviews for predictable reasons. It is too reliant on horror tropes and jump- scares, tries to give the movie gravitas by using a snuff-movie aesthetic, and the characters are not particularly well-rounded or likable. And while these criticisms hold up, as a fan of horror movies I can still say I enjoyed the hell out of this movie. Warts and all, Sinister does something that less and less movies do these days: it scared the crap out of me. And beyond that, it did it without resorting to the usual fare of extreme violence and cynicism, while still maintaining an extremely brutal and grisly atmosphere.

Our movie starts out with crime writer Ellisson Oswalt, moving into a new home to investigate the gruesome murder of a family for his upcoming novel. He is down on his luck, his latest successful work being written ten years ago, and is aching for new success. It is in this house where he finds a collection of Super-8 tapes that shows families being together at various family outings, cut to a bleak, poorly lit scene were these families are murdered in the most horrific ways possible. Against his better judgement, he decides not to go to the police with these tapes, but uses them as material to write a new non-fiction novel that he hopes will bring him new success. As the story progresses, he discovers that he might have gotten more than that he bargained for, and that something inexplicable is going on, and horror fans can pretty much fill in the blanks from there.

Ellisson, played by Ethan Hawke, is very similar to the self-centered alcoholic writer for whom his work absorbs him to the point he neglects his family. Mildly arrogant, obsessive and easily possessed by both internal and external demons, he is not the most original character. But Ethan Hawke plays him well, and he is well-rounded enough to carry the story. His character traits, tropes or not, hooked me in and made the character empathetic enough to be interested into what happens during the rest of the story. The rest of the characters are very much set- dressing. Not particularly deep or involving and very much used as devices for the movie. Ethan Hawke pretty much has to carry the movie, and despite the fact his character is old as dirt, he is pretty compelling.

But even though the characters are clichéd, and the story is slightly predictable, this movie is still pretty great. The main reason is simply because its scary. The videos that Ellisson discovers are genuinely disturbing, the build-up of the story is methodical and grisly, slowly working towards great jump-scares (and I love jump-scares. Screw you if you dislike cheap shocks, if it makes me jump out of my seat I like it), all with a phenomenal atmosphere to boot. Props also for the music and sound effects in this movie. The entire house creaks and fumbles, the atonal, dreary music gives the movie a strong sense of dread and despair, and the ominous music that plays as Ellisson watches the Super- 8 video tapes made me feel genuinely queasy.

Sinister to me falls into a list of movies that had mixed reviews because of the obvious flaws of the story and characters, but I can still heartily recommend because they genuinely scared me and were rich with atmosphere. Films like The Strangers, The Woman in Black and Rec, for me, also fall under that category. Scary, atmospheric movies that deserve way more praise than they received, and deserve some recognition. I can heartily recommend this movie if you like a good scare.

This review can also be found at my blog: http://dutchentertainmentjunkie.blogspot.nl/2012/11/sinister_25.html

Armageddon is your typical Michael Bay movie: Loud, Stupid, shallow, but ultimately very watchable, humorous and spectacular too.

When I started watching this movie, I was not disappointed. The introduction on the oil platform was very funny, and Bruce Willis hitting golf balls into a Greenpeace boat was something that made men laugh loudly. The roles were played well, and it was all amusing. The fun lasted, and lasted, right until the moment that the president gave a speech about how America is going to save the world etc, etc, and the all the drilling idiots got onto the rocket.

It all went downhill from there. The silly but fun humor was replaced with gung-ho patriotism, the action scenes were stupid and the events became so far-fetched that not even the most beautifully filmed explosions couldsave the movie from drowning in epic retardation. A sad case because the movie started off quite alright, but ended up being a complete train-wreck.

I still give it a six because I found it entertaining, but very shallow and silly and with a poor second half. The special effects, the soundtrack and the way it was filmed (Bay's frenetic, constantly moving camera has been appealing since it worked so great in the Rock, and it has never lost its charm since if you ask me) made up a great deal to me (plus, the first 60% of the movie WAS entertaining, so a 6 is to me quite an adequate grade).

This is probably the most inane and lifeless piece of cinema I have ever observed. It contains some of the most tepid and stupid dialogues in the history of movies, is filmed in a disgusting yellow-ish CGI piece of crap that is supposed to be visually stunning, and has retarded written all over it. I still can't bear the fact that I have actually finished watching the movie, something I regret intensely.

So how come they succeeded in making such a decent idea so awfully tedious? Well, there are a few suggestions: - Instead of creating deep and intelligent characters, just let the actors look slightly angry ALL THE TIME, and give them the chance to scream in a stupid way every single time they have the opportunity. This is Sparta,could be proclaimed in a slightly less loud and abrasive way, thank you.

• Try to make your kickass slow-mo effects so random that it'll give you a head-ache immediately. - Never, ever, mix up epic with self-indulgence. It is stupid. It feels stupid. - Underuse great actors as much as you can, and make sure it's clear that they all have a very serious form of down syndrome too by letting them scream (I know I've mentioned this one before, but such a retardation deserves extra room)

• Portray women as whores who'll sell out for anything

• Try and make the battle look extremely chaotic, this certainly adds to the feel of a well-organized, well-trained group of extremely skilled soldiers. What tactics? Randomly killing probably is more effective if you're outnumbered one to thousand!

So there you have it. A film that is horrible, if not tediously retarded. And do not come with the whole 'visually stunning' argument, If yellow-ish CGI colouring and random slow-motion would make a movie good, then there wouldn't be people like, o, I don't know: writers and stuff! Don't see 300. And if you have, my sweet and honest condolences. Don't see 300. It is plain mediocrity, at best.

No, it is not a smart movie, or a well written one, but this movie certainly has it's goods, and one can hardly deny it is fairly entertaining.

The goods were pretty obvious. Stunning visuals, brilliant editing, mind-blowing set pieces, say about mister Bay what you will, he has always had an eye for the visual. And this is an absolute plus to all his work, basically. But we can also state that Bay's previous work, with a few exception, was nonetheless fairly disappointing. Transformers went further than just the visual shebang.

The movie had a good sense of humor too. It was clear that everyone knew that one can hardly take a few car robots seriously, and so no one didn't. Which is a good thing. It made the movie one hell of a lot funnier. The actor's were cool too. Shia LaBouf is a great lead role, John Turturro, John Voight, Anthony Anders and others had really cool side roles, and they made the movie worthwhile.

The only downs were the ridiculousness that often crawled onto the screen, of course fault to the slightly preposterous script. Usually I cringe with issues like these, but aforementioned points somehow made the movie awfully amusing. A great watch, especially in the cinemas, but maybe somewhat less entertaining to watch on a TV. be warned

Satire disguised as cartoon or cartoon disguised as satire? No matter how you want to see it, this musical-like movie based on the well-known series has insulted several people, mocked them, and said horrible things about them, but also made most of those people rolling on the floor of laughter.

I love South Park. I think it is brilliantly written and very rewarding for those who pay close attention because there are so many comical layers that you want to watch the series and this movies multiple times so you can peel all those humorist layers off.

The movie tells the story of 4 boys, Kyle, Eric, Stan and Kenny, who get to see a movie with tons of profanity. Being so impressed with the movie, Kenny Makes a dubious bet and sets himself on fire. Because of this, their mothers find a protest group, Mothers Against Canada, and eventually the U.S. government blames Canada for spoiling American youth. Canada bombs the Baldwins, and the U.S. declares war on Canada, and promises to execute Terrence and Philip. but this must not happen, because if that happens, because if these two figures get executed, Satan, currently having a gay relationship with Saddam Hussein, will come up to earth, making havoc and mischief. Therefore Stan, Kyle and Eric make a group of resistance children to stop the execution and their mothers once and for all.

Such a wildly absurd premise is not only completely ridiculous, but also outrageously funny and a very good basis for political satire and hilarious one-liners like: "The MPAA says: Horrific exploited violence is okay, as long as there aren't any naughty words! that, is what this war is about!". It got me rolling out of my seat. Trey Parker and Matt Stone are extremely sharp and always let you know that they know what they're talking about. Great, great movie.

the third entry in the Mission Impossible is incidentally the best, and is brought to screen with a lot of flair and wonderful set pieces. The action is filmed brilliantly and the new scenes are quite wonderfully filmed.

The soundtrack is also a big improvement, relying more on a more classical, real sound. There is a theatrical touch to it that feels outrageous and likable.

The cast is well assembled too, with Philip Seymour-Hoffman as the perfect villain and Jonathan Rhys-Meyers, Vhing Rhames and Maggie Q as Ethan's team members. They are all great actors who are clearly having fun playing their parts.

And even though the ending was a bit rushed, and some of the events were awfully stupid, the third and possibly final part of the Mission Impossible series combines the best things of the first two movies, and adds new elements to take the series up a notch. I say well done. If you like action movies this is the one to check out.

No really, I don't. Because it was not only incredibly stupid, half of the time it didn't make any sense at all. I don't mind violence at all, as long as it is done for a valid and proper reason. That Wallace killed off half of England screaming FREEDOM! all the time because some jackass killed his wife. Pure nonsense, I'm telling you.

Secondly, all the action scenes were filmed with this horrible shaky handy-cam view to give you the feeling you are 'in the battle'. This is the point were I really lose all my interest. Why would you make blurred shots, that shake all the time, if it does not truly enhance the visual style of the movie in any way at all? Of course you're not in the battle! And even if you were, you wouldn't shake like that all the time! Honestly, get a clue.

Then the acting. Good god, all the drama and nonsense. I really hate the overacting they sometimes put in movies. It was okay in Lord of the Rings, but here it was dramatic. Bland expressions and faces, people getting angry for no proper reason, no person in the movie tried to say something a bit realistic like: let's try to think out a normal solution instead of fighting in terrible greyly coloured landscapes. No,everyone was screaming, and/or looking as stupid as possible.

This movie lacked so many things, was so gray and boring, overlong and with a lot of irrational actions, I really disliked it. A lot. Possibly the most overrated movie I have ever seen.

Funny to see how Clooney, usually known as a very down to earth and classy person, tries to keep up with Kaufman, known for his bizarre scripts. I am glad he succeeded very well, and that the bizarre story was made with so much of the smoothness we usually recognize in Clooney's acting too. Really terrific.

The story follows Chuck Barris, played in an excellent manner by Sam Rockwell, who used his awful TV game show as a cover-up for his CIA actions and murders. And even though I didn't really buy the strange story at first, I dared to take a peek because of all the big names in it. I was pleasantly surprised.

Don't think the story is ridiculous. Even the most strange, ludicrous and bizarre stories can be formed into interesting and brilliant movies by skilled people (Kill Bill, Big Lebowski, and Eternal Sunshine spring to mind).

The dialog was snappy, the acting perfect, the camera-work and visual style quite enjoyable and the pacing perfect. The only downside to the movie was that sometimes it wasn't truly clear what was real and what was not. You'll have a hard time following some of the things you see. Still, a brilliant and interesting flick that is certainly worth a watch.

I liked it. I really did. Not only because I am a big fan of Fincher's work (with the exception of Alien 3), and I thought that he really did a good job with this one. Even though the plot is not always as cohesive as it should be, there is brilliant camera work, visual tricks that are A-class Fincher, good acting, solid suspense, an interesting premise and decent dialog.

It was hard for me to dislike those things. Were many people get irritated by some of the plot holes (which is some sort of thing Fincher makes mistakes in more often, i have to admit, if you look at The Game for example), I could hardly notice them because of all the excitement and tension the movie was building up to.

Hard to dislike it's slick style. Period. I give this movie my fullest recommendation for everyone who wants a simple thriller with excellent camera-work, acting and directing. I give it a 7/10

This movie took 90 minutes. Those must have been the longest 90 minutes in all my life, because I thought this thing was 3 hours, or something like that. I half fell asleep, twice, and even though the beautiful landscape was pretty decent, the makers forgot one very important thing: pace.

Because this could have been quite an interesting documentary, if it would last for 30 minutes.

Further on, the characters. Who comes up with a name like dude in a 'cultural study', something about different civilizations for god sakes. Why don't they just name the movie 'dude, where's my camel?' and be done with it.

Oscar nomination my ass. I fell asleep with this sleeper movie. So, damn.

I mean, come on. This is the kind of bubble gum pop-rock entertainment with gratuitous violence every single mainstream viewer is waiting for. Big deal if you only watch independent movies. This flick was properly made and genuinely exciting.

Adrenaline-pumping, interesting, and just genuinely solid, this movie has great sound effects, visual effects, proper acting, a decent story and bedazzling camera use.

Michael Bay has kind of made a whole lot of bad movies after this perfectly entertaining work. Armageddon, Pearl Harbor, the Island, face it, it was crap. And now he is going to make a Transformers movie. But a PG-rated, teen-orientated version for god's sake. Come on Mike, we know you can do decent stuff!!

No seriously, think about it. Tom Cruise had to play an arrogant and irritating achiever, a moneymaker at it's finest. Penelope Cruz had to be beautiful. And Cameron Diaz had to give a good performance. The story was laid out that way. Period.

Also, the story. Many complain about it and said they didn't understand it at all, but I thought it was all pretty clear. We even got a proper explanation at the end.

Also, who would know that such a confronting and gloaming story could be molded into such a warm little gem? This movie was genuinely feel-good, even though it's difficulties and events were heavy-weight and intriguing.

Everything in this movie worked. At least, it worked for eyes, it worked for ears, it worked for brains, it satisfied the senses refreshingly well. The pace was just perfect, and the cinematography divine. I rest my case. Vanilla Sky is one of the most emotionally brilliant trips ever made.

This movie comes to perfection in every single way. This movie is one of those movies which has a script that makes you think, it's a movie that literally is dripping with style. I love it! the acting is good (but not extremely brilliant, I have to admit), the directing great, the cinematography and music genuinely good, and everything runs smooth. If there is a movie to compare this one with, it might just compare to ocean's eleven. Even though the story differs a lot, the style, the smoothness and the brilliant Hollywood style make them (both) worth watching.

10 out of 10

Many reviews on the internet complain about this movie as if it is a standard blockbuster which is generally bad and has no intelligence at all. I Believe the movie deserves much better than that.

First of all, the soundtrack. Hans Zimmer who has done another great job, again. He just is a master of giving mediocre movies an extra shot of blockbuster nonsense to make them watchable and enjoyable. There is hardly a denying that it makes scenes vivid and exstatic, in it's own way.

The action was pretty good too. Coming from a master of action like John Woo, wo would expect otherwise. Who cares about realism if you got Tom Cruise racing through flames on a motorbike? I don't, at least.

And the sidekicks were cool. Ving Rhames, Anthony Hopkins, they were all small but likable parts making the movie feel more comfortable.

I would love to see the 3 and a half-hour, R-rated version Woo intended to release, but was thrown away by the studios because they wanted a standard PG-rated title. A crying shame, if you ask me, because you could certainly smell something of a classic through the silliness that had this movie.

But I still liked it. I liked it because it was edited so energetic, so vibrant, with so much allure and elegance brought to screen, that it is hard for me not to like it, and I forgive them for a lot of his faults and plot holes for that reason. Let's hope Woo will once strike back and make movies of the same class and brilliance of his Chinese works.

This series, told throughout 26 episodes, combines the very best of mafia movies and anime. It's beautiful action, crisp, clean and stunning visuals, great storyline, sensitive music, and most of all, it's heart -because the makers clearly put a lot of emotion in it-, make this series an all-time classic which is an obligation to everyone who's interested in gangster-films or anime. This series is, without a doubt, top-notch. Because I also forget to mention the dialogues, the great screenplay, and in-depth characters.

P.S.

Watch the subbed Japanese version, the American dubbed version is somewhat out of shape in the plot. The Japanese dialogues are more subtle and seem to fit more in the series.