Reviews

The main reason I enjoyed The Monuments Men is because it is a perfect combination between a true story and a humorous one. Creating an enjoyable movie experience.

Centering around a group of artists, historians, and architects; Tasked with retrieving stolen arts and sculptures from Nazi Germany during World War 2. From the very beginning; the writers put a lot of emphasis on the important task to retrieve the stolen arts and return them to their owners.

While the task seems impossible and at the time quite ridiculous, Leader of the platoon Frank Stokes (George Clooney) is determined to save the pieces of history of human kind. While also reminding everyone that no amount of human life is worth sacrificing for a piece of art. A moral question that comes into play throughout the story.

What attracted me to the film were the dynamics between the platoon members, how they are all different from one another and yet share the same passion for art.

As I mentioned earlier, this film is a great combination between a true story and a humorous one, nowadays; it seems all movies based on a true story have to be dramatic, filled with depth, show a darker tone and image of the person the audience would have chosen not to see. Take for instance the movies of Elvis (2022) and Blonde (2022).

In the case of The Monuments Men; it is based on a true story. And even if not all the characters are real; they are amusing and all play a significant role. The story in itself is interesting, Combined with a bit of drama and humor and an uplifting soundtrack by Alexandre Desplat. With both elements combined - the movie becomes an enjoyable experience.

I guess the best advise I could give for film creators who struggle to make a movie based on a true story. Aside of staying true to the source material, is to enjoy the experience, have the movie filled with simple moments between characters and dynamics that reveal more about the characters we as audience are supposed to empathize with.

Avatar: The Last Airbender Netflix version is a bit of a mixed bag; on one hand it fails to capture the magic of the original series, on the other hand it seems to stay very loyal to the source material from first watch. The best way to look at this show is from an open mind, there is no other way.

Let's dive into the world of Avatar by examining pros and cons, we'll focus on the pros first: The visual effects are stunning and look most impressive, same for the entire world and locations created from story board to screen. In general everything that has to do with the surroundings is at a most high level and I appreciate the care for detail.

In terms of story, it seems the creators decided to go with a 'Game of Thrones' approach: political games, schemes and backstabbing, wars and careful planning. I for once am in favor of this approach and believe it fits well the world of Avatar (after all, there is war in the show, people die).

Zuko's arc is very well crafted, mostly because it is the most interesting of the show (both original and Netflix). From being a banished prince to a man and leader of his own destiny. Dallas Liu portrays him very well and overall it seems he's the only character amongst the others who wasn't harmed by the script.

There are other good things to say about the show but for now we'll move to the cons: The biggest problem the show suffers from is that the creators focus mainly on the story and not the characters. In the original series, you had many filler episodes that focused on the dynamics: the episode Tales of Ba Sing Se, when the Gaang get lost in the caves with the group of hippies; Zuko and Azula going on a summer vacation with their friends.

You have many examples of character dynamics; Katara and Toph arguing, Zuko and uncle Iroh on the run throughout Book 2. There are Also moments when the characters are just acting silly. I feel all those little dynamics were absent throughout the show it could have added much more depth.

Because there were no filler episodes, there was no real chance at diving into the characters, after all Aang, Katara and Sokka are basically kids, so why not show them as kids having fun? ATLA is a show about kids on a journey, about friendship. Imagine the movie 'Stand by me' only at war times.

Another big problem the show suffers from is the pacing, this season alone is only 8 episodes, for a show like Avatar it is way too rushed. In one episode alone we were introduced to King Bumi, Jet and The Mechanist. I know Netflix couldn't make a full season of 20 episodes of live action ATLA. It's like demanding a live action version of One Piece with 100 episodes each season - in terms of budget and production it is impossible. Even a 10- or 12- part season would have been fine. I really don't see the reason to rush the story and cut corners.

In conclusion, I feel this show overall is a fair adaptation and possibly the best version of ATLA we could have got in live action. If Netflix wants this show to really succeed, they are going to have to put more effort in the script and characters, as of now this series is far from reaching the same level of magic the original show possessed.

Ted is funny show full of nonsense nonstop. The type of 'feel good' shows that you want to watch during the weekends and relax to.

For those who were wishing for a third movie of Ted, this show is by far the most we will get. Until Seth MacFarlane finally puts an end to Family Guy, we'll just have to get used to a series which is as good as the movies.

Hopefully the success of the series will lead to a second season and a third film, because as of now Ted has been quite a hit; surprisingly good and funny which I'm glad for. In times when comedy is hard to acquire and you can't find a lot of comedy shows or movies, Ted gives a pathway for a good laugh.

Seth MacFarlane is funny as always, adding much attitude to each character he voices. His dialogues with co star Max Burkholder are the main source of comedy in the series, all their dialogues together are amusing and fun to laugh at. Burkholder is great and holds some resemblance to Mark Wahlberg which is pretty impressive.

Overall I really enjoyed watching this show, Me and my brother spent most of the weekends watching it and laughing hard which was great and I hope season 2 will come soon enough to enjoy those weekends once again.

Dreamgirls is a great movie, with a killer soundtrack, an ensemble cast of talented actors and an impressive production design that makes you dive into the vibe the movie gives.

As much as I don't like Musicals (again, except for The Blues Brothers. West Side Story is also great but has it's own downs). I gotta give praises to Dreamgirls for all the sayings above. The only complaint I have is that just like any other musical, the characters don't know when to shut up and stop singing. Every 5 to 10 minutes there must be someone to sing or dance.

Based on the Broadway musical and the musical group 'Diana Ross and The Supremes.' The film follows the tale of A trio of Black female soul singers rising to fame and facing personal struggles. I do love stories that tell 'The Rise and Fall of ...' yet this film actually ends on a happy note which I'm also glad for.

The whole production design and sets as I mentioned are fantastic, really colorful and impressive. The transition between scenes from a simple practice of the trio to a live performance is so clean and superb. The Hairstyling for Deena Jones (Beyonce) is great and fits her well with every outfit design.

The cast of actors is amazing and each one gives 100% of a performance, Jamie Foxx portrays a villain unlike any other could have. Beyonce and Jennifer Hudson are Top Tier, both their performances are filled with emotion and enthusiasm. Hudson deserved her academy award and Beyonce's performance of the song 'Listen' is powerful. In Addition, her resemblance in the film to Diana Ross is shockingly good.

To me, the real surprise was Eddie Murphy. His performance as James 'Thunder' Early is hilarious and surprisingly touching. Sure, his character cheats on everyone and uses drugs, yet something about him is vulnerable and I enjoyed watching Murphy take on a serious role. He should have won the academy award for Best Supporting Actor in 2006 if it wasn't for Alan Arkin in 'Little Miss Sunshine'.

Although, Being a Scorsese fanatic, I probably would have given my vote to Mark Wahlberg in 'The Departed'.

Overall I enjoyed this film and loved it's great soundtrack, the whole vibe and music from the 60s and 70s must have persuaded me but I mostly enjoyed the story and characters.

The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is study case on admiration turned into obsession. A close examination of how a young man is driven by jealousy towards a person he once admired.

Upon viewing the film, I've noticed how the bitter relationship between James (Pitt) and Ford (Affleck) is the main element, the main focus. The two characters have an off-putting relationship that's not even considered "Mentor - Trainee". Ford is simply portrayed as a kid who wanted his hero to take notice of him. Only once James did take notice and joked over his admirer. Ford's admiration turned into obsession, which finally turned into resentment.

Speaking of acting, Pitt is wonderful and really captivating, from body movements to sowing fear into the other characters. All his nuances are implanted in the script in a delicate way which makes it fascinating and frighting sometimes.

I can't say the same dough about Affleck, something about his acting was really annoying and felt insecure. Though it is clear his character is supposed to resemble a fan, an admirer. I wasn't moved by his emotions. Hence why the ending didn't surprise me.

As for the cinematography by Roger Deakins, I was completely astounded. Every image and shot was so beautiful and captivating. The dark shots of the train in the opening sequence, the single shot of Robert Ford fading in from the mirror, the amount of heavily detailed shots in a single film is the type of work I trust only Deakins to make.

Overall I'm really impressed by this movie, the soundtrack that accompanies the film by Nick Cave and Warren Ellis is authentic and fits the tone so well. Along with the bitter relationship between James and Ford which is filled with emotion and hostile behavior make this movie a must watch among cinephiles.

True Romance is a fun, entertaining and full of ride movie. Quite a Tarantino film you can say. If anyone would have told me this film was directed by him, I would have probably believed them.

Starring the lovely couple duo Christian Slater and Patricia Arquette, along with an assemble of other great actors. This odd romance film is a pleasant surprise for anyone who whishes to watch a romance story with some bits of action and violence that only Tarantino can deliver.

I would even extend and say this movie reminded me of Baby Driver (2017), one of my all-time favorite movies. Maybe Baby was inspired by True Romance.

The script manages to swift the audience throughout the whole story: starting with what seems as a simple love tale, leading to a crime and murder, following a chase around the country and a journey for freedom.

Another element implanted into the story are the characters being film buffs and pop culture nerds, whenever there is a movie reference or a conversation about movies you can feel that it's Tarantino's writing style, a style that I love so much and wish to make myself one day.

Overall I really enjoyed this film and think it's a nice mixture between love and violence, the kind of mixture I didn't know Quentin can write but glad he did.

Bram Stoker's Dracula is an interesting take on the infamous Count from Romania. Dracula has always been perceived as this mysterious, monsteras, blood sucking evil creature. What Stoker and Coppola did in this case was give the character emotion and a tragic love story - a bit similar to Romeo and Juliet if you ask me.

I'll start this review with the positive aspects in my opinion: The costume designs, makeup and set decorations are amongst the most impressive I have seen in a nineties film. No wonder the movie won Best costume design and Best makeup at the Academy Awards. These aspects are captivating and feel true to the story's setting and timeline.

In terms of what was negative, I had to point out towards two things: the acting and editing: The Editing of the film felt a bit rough to me, for example, When Professor Van Helsing (Anthony Hopkins) comes to the conclusion that the characters are facing a menace. Suddenly there is a cut to Dracula (Gary Oldman) in his grave, having a somewhat stroke. It is these kinds of small moments where the editing is not at its best.

The Acting wasn't my favorite part and I felt quite annoyed by it at some times. Don't get me wrong, Gary Oldman is a fantastic actor and his portrayal is suburb. But his acting is the only muscle that carries the movie's weight. The acting in general in really theatrical (which would make sense due to the period the story is placed). But I'm not a fan of theatrical acting (which is why I'm not a fan of Musicals). I should also point out that Keanu Reeves in this movie looks like he just came out from the set of Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure.

Overall I did enjoy the take on Dracula's story and his tragic love affair with Mina (Winona Ryder). This movie is a good example of how it's possible to humanize a villain, A writing technique that I really appreciate in movies. The more the villain is humanized and shares emotion, the better the viewers will empathize with him.

The Killer starring Michael Fassbender is a stunning and good movie. Although lacks a bit of excitement. Something throughout the whole movie felt off to me.

Based on the graphic novel by Alexis Nolent and Luc Jacamon. The Killer is a good movie with a dark tone to it. I love the green colors that are present throughout the whole film. The type of green and pastel colors that have become a key feature in Fincher's movies.

The visuals and cinematography are also beautiful, I know some of the shots during the film are mostly taken by drones so it isn't much of a cinematography but the visuals are still very well made.

Although the other aspects are well done, the main issue with the film is its story: it just feels a little empty. An assassin battles a bunch of other assassins and employers on an international killing spree. Which was all caused in the first place because he messed up at his job.

Michael Fassbender is a great actor, that goes without saying. It's just his character that's full of flaws. The Killer is supposed to be a professional assassin: really clean, precise and cautious (and he definitely is, the short montage of the first chapter shows how careful and direct he is as a killer). The problem going forward is the way he executes his missions: he makes mistakes, false calculations, gets ambushed in some cases. The Killer isn't your typical 007 agent but rather a more calculating type who's misfortune in some cases.

I would say this isn't Fincher's brightest film, sure it may be visually impressive and edited in a suburb way. But just the story and turn of events feels off to me.

Denis Villeneuve is a magnificent and brilliant director, in his case he either makes good movies or he doesn't make movies at all. Truly one of the only directors nowadays in Hollywood who makes movies with a deep passion and love to the art.

His Keymark film would have to be his first movie titled "Incendies," a horrible and strong tale about broken promises and family secrets. The story centers around twins who travel to the middle east to discover their family history. In order to fulfill their mother's last wish.

The movie is split into two time periods: the past focusing on the mother and her voyages across the war-torn country. And the present focusing on the twins and their effort to discover the past.

God forbid if I dare spoil the ending of this massive movie, you're just going to have to watch and be amazed by yourself.

Aside of the subtle soundtrack by Gregoire Hertzel, the cinematography by Andre Turpin, and the editing by Monique Dartonne. The movie has a really unique tone, it's a simple story about family and dealing with the past as it is, to embrace it.

I have to say though that I had a problem with the characters chemistry throughout the story, I felt like there wasn't much balance between the twins, I was way more intrigued and interested in Jeanne's quest than Simon. Jeanne was more active and determent to find out about her father's identity. Simon was really passive up until it was his turn to discover his brother's identity.

I'm glad I finally watched this film, it was a chilling and frighting experience, not only did I enjoy the story and the journey all characters went through, but I came to respect and adore Villeneuve even more as a filmmaker.

A Quiet Place Part II is a chilling experience from start to finish. It captures the magic and emotion of the first film while strengthens the feeling of being on the edge of our seats.

The story is pretty much the same as the first film, The Abbot family struggling to survive in a world where aliens with high hearing capabilities hunt down everything that makes sound.

The big twist of the plot is that now the family knows how to kill the scary looking creatures, with high volume from a sound speaker and a clean head shot to the head. What I found so cleaver in both films was the use of a mute character (the girl Regan) to empower the use of silence. A major key factor in the entire soon to be franchise.

The movie starts surprisingly, with an opening sequence that reveals how the aliens came down to earth and rampaged the town of our main characters. I found it to be so weird to hear sound at the beginning, it was somewhat refreshing to hear voices and sounds for a good 10 to 15 minutes.

As I praised before in my last review of A Quiet Place, the sound department in the key and soul of the film, the one thing that makes it special. I do want to praise as well the cast of actors: Emily Blunt, Cillian Murphy and the rest are doing such a good work with a script that is based on silence, sign language and nothing else.

Overall, I really enjoyed the film, Although I did find some errors within the script, maybe not the script but brash decisions made by characters during the plot that were made mainly to add tension and suspense.

In the Mood for Love is a story about love, loneliness, mistakes, and secrecy.

The film by Kar-Wai Wong tells the story of two neighbors, both of which are married. However, once they suspect their spouses have betrayed them, they form a strong bond, yet a platonic and simple one so as not to commit similar mistakes.

What I love so much about this film is its simple tone and mainly the relationship between Mr. Chow (Tony Leung) and Mrs. Chan (Maggie Cheung). Their chemistry together is so genuine and might I say fragile, both characters tend to keep a low profile as fear of being exposed.

If you pay attention at the beginning of the movie, when both characters move apartment on the same day. Mr. Chow gives Mrs. Chan one of her belongings back. It's a simple two-three second interaction, no glances, no love at first sight. But it is so crucial for the development of their bond. It had to start from somewhere.

I enjoyed the soundtrack by Michael Galasso, Nat 'King' Cole and Shigeru Umebayashi, even though it sometimes was repetitive. It was a beautiful theme that accompanied the scenes. The costumes of Mrs. Chan are beautiful and really captivating. The subtle camera visuals and movements are clean and capture the art of the scene.

In many ways the movie reminded me of "Lost in Translation" by Sophia Coppola. A film about two people who are very lonely and form a strong bond. Those are the kind of movies I empathized with and find much admiration.