Honky dory TAB

New review!



First of all. I know nothing about the character, nor the story of Solomon Kayne other then that he is from the creator of Conan. Now, I'm a avid Conan fan (since 9-10 years) but when I heard there was going to be a movie about this character, I literally jumped for joy since I think Robert E. Howard creates such fantastic tales and worlds.

I also found it quite intriguing that its wasn't your typical "Holly-film" with big names. This is a trend that have existed for a long, long time but lately filmmakers have begun to direct outside of the corporate system in order not to have the investors ruin the movies. Fine examples of this is recent movies like The Hurt Locker, Moon, District 9, and lately Kick-ass. this is a really good trend and since its become easier for filmmakers to apply effects and such they can limit their budget quite. Another thing is that you also get unknown actors really that fit the movie structure and arcs needed. Plus there is now way of them just hamming it up through the movie, as big stars sometimes tend to do.

But this movie has its sheer amount of stars. Solomon Kane (James Purefoy) is a mercenary of Queen Elizabeth's army fighting in Africa, where he comes face-to-face with the Devil's Reaper – a demon who collects the Devil's debts i.e. souls – refusing to go to hell just yet, he evades the Reaper and starts a new life in an English monastery. With this new life, Solomon has left-behind his culture of violence and bloodshed and instead now embraces the values of peace and non-values. But once he is expelled from the monastery due to the fear of the Devil's Reaper returning, he must travel back to his home in Devon and along the way he befriends a travelling family of puritans heading to the New World. On their journey through the British counties, the family is attacked, and their daughter Meredith (Rachel Hurd-Wood) is abducted by the evil sorcerer Malachi's army, which is lead on the front lines by the mysterious Masked Rider. Now a man of peace, Solomon must go back to his former life as a man of unrepentant violence and destruction to save Meredith.

Kane is real douche in the start of the movie and I found little remorse or empathy for his ways of getting to the goal, but after his encounter, he is truly a "changed" man and he then starts to form a bond with the traveling family. His sins are never forgotten as his speaks clearly about his past. There is no sugarcoating here. He has done terrible things. We learn that as a young boy he was forced into priesthood by his father (Max von Sydow), but refused and ran away from home. Leaving the empire that his father and brother now rule in, he sets of for gold and glory

The characters both look and feels genuine. The costume is top-notch and highly authentic.
Some of the main characters are introduced a bit to late. Like the main baddie Malichi, who controls the mysterious rider and his army of corrupted. He is only spoken for thought the movie but only shows up the last 5 minutes. A small intro/encounter of this character would have been a huge improvement for the main arc

The atmosphere is what sells the movie and is superb and really sets the mood. Its half-snowing, foggy and plain eerie. It bears all the markings of a fantasy landscape and interesting setting. It also helps that there is dead people and crows everywhere. Hanging from trees getting their skin devoured. Its raining and theres mud all over. The filming must have been hell, but it really pays of and gives the movie a right feel. Its the way a Robert E. Howard movie should look and feel. Desolate plains, castles and villages, brewing with dark magic and all covered in strong religious themes.

I had a blast watching this. The pacing is for the most part good and felt proper for such a movie of this genre. Its a good romp and a fun time. The actions are believable. Characters could have been developed a bit more as well as interacted more. The story kinda unfolds along the way. giving it a unpredictable ending. Theres a lot of gore and fast-paced action shots. The fighting is quite good and topped of with some amazing slow-motion sequences. There is also quite a lot of effects in this movie and they do look on par with most big budget movies nowadays. the costume design and atmosphere is really a breath of fresh air and gives the movie a solid style.

Despite being a "low budget" film, the director get the most out of it and then some. If your a fan of the fantasy/action genre, then this is a must watch!

Score: 9/10

Labels: movie review

Mike from Red Letter Media (AKA the guy who put together the epic, 70-minute review of The Phantom Menace) is back again with his even epic-er review of Attack of the Clones. This time, seven Youtube videos were insufficient to contain the hatred, so Mike spread out a 90-minute review over nine Youtube videos. See them all , and let the hate flow through you.

Part 1 begins, “Star Wars, Episode 2: Attack of the Clones is the worst thing ever made by a human…” That basically sets the tone for the rest of the review:





This is a really in-depth review and a good one at that.. but its way, way to long and could have been conduced to a 30 min review perhaps.. There is also a lot of "serial-killer", "mad geek" skits that I dont really find amusing. Other then the sheer absurdity of them.

But the whole "we have to have a lightsaber shown every five minutes" blew me away. (that and the younglings training gear)

Labels: movie review

Plot: Detective Sherlock Holmes and his stalwart partner Watson engage in a battle of wits and brawn with a nemesis whose plot is a threat to all of England.

I had no expectation for Guy Richie's version of Holmes going in to the cinema, and I came away the same. The movie in its own was fun, quick, and had strong characters but it bump into tempo issues, and somewhat pointless character arcs. I almost forgot it 10 minutes after I saw it.

It lack the spark that Richie is known for. Its there, but its a bit to conveyorbelt with Robert Downey Jr driving the whole thing. Its to safe and by the book/suits if you ask me. Also I was a bit sadend to see guy Richie making such a bland frame to work with.. Slow-motion aside. Was there really any scenes that stood out? Don't get me wrong. It was nicely shot and edited but the whole thing seemed so artificial and quick.

CGI also stands out alot in this one. This might be because we have been overexposed to it the last years. It gave me the same feeling that Steven Summers have (Director of Mummy series/Van helsing/GI JOE) Maybe this was intended but it stood out alot in booth good and bad ways. Everything is dirty and I think the closest thing to a clean Holmes we get is in the poster. He looks nothing like it in the movie. His character was a little two sided for me as he`s scruffy, drugged out looking drinker at one point and then he has to sharpen up and become the master detective, three min later. These two sides of his performance collided to much for me and left me thinking that the writers wanted Downey's rough shenanigans as well as the traditional Sherlock that we all know. It became just to much of a mix.

The strongest "character beat" for me when Holmes had "agreed" to go to a dinner with Watsons fiancée. This is a sequence where you can really see Holmes struggle to work within a social environment as he is obsessed with details. Also strong is the sequence right after where he dissects the fiancée. The way this is delivered was spot on perfect and really explained alot between Holmes and Watson relationship

Granted the bromance between Holmes and Watson was fun and well developed but it came out of such a weird angle that I was more baffled to why the hell do this characters like each-other? This was semi-saved by Holmes "planting" objects for Watson in order for him to get intrigued but it didn't ad up and left a strange rhythm between the two leads. Holmes was a real douchebag in certain scenes and while the audience was laughing I got the feeling that it got underplayed. Like the setting and characters where just there in-order to make a certain joke. I cant really explain it but it took me out of it.

Rachel Macadams is a good actress but here she is just the plaything/instigator for Holmes to follow a "plan" She might have been designed inorder to work for a franchise perhaps? She was kinda interesting since we are told nothing of this character in advance and she totally owns Holmes (twice) but then the interest for her fades as we are given (a bit to obvious) clues about her and Holmes history and she gets reduced to a plot device unfortunately

The mystery was also way to undefined for me to follow. Its almost as if you weren't supposed to figure stuff out on your own as well as it feeding you way to much of what to believe just to snag it away at the last act. I was left cheated and after a while I didn't really care what was going on since it was going to be explained anyway at the end. It didn't really have a overall impact on what was going on. Its way to much all over. Plus at the very end, your introduced to another thing

The one thing that got me intrigued was how Mark Strongs character Lord Blackwood had survived the hanging. That was really the only thing that got me trough the movie. Plot wise that is



Bottom line:
The movie is fun and quick and it pulls most of the mysteries together so that most plot holes are covered before the ending. It got a little to "da vinci code" at times where you got flashbacks to something that would act as a much stronger act device if left alone.

I might be overreacting for a "fun" movie, but the movie is highly forgettable which is really sad. Its a lot of fun and its style is great but it feels nutated and done quick. If at all at least Guy Richie is making movies again.

4/10

Labels: movie review

Back with a long overdue movie review. This time its JJ. Abrahams newest movie Star Trek.



Plot:
A chronicle of the early days of James T. Kirk and his fellow USS Enterprise crew members

Let it be said that I am not the biggest trek fan. Ive seen most of enterprise and some of the movies. I'm more into Firefly, Babylon 5, Battlestar Galactic (old and new) but still respect "Trek" for what it is. Its many questions and discoveries as well as the moral dilemmas and choices as well as pure entertainment and thrill

Ile get on..

The story in the Star Trek movie is fairly spares and underdeveloped. This is mostly because of the whole reboot take. JJ. had to reintroduce to the younger audience while pleasing the older fan-base and thus I feel that the movie lacks a serious story arc. Overall is almost a side plot. Despite this JJ. manages to make Star trek his own thing. It light, fast, pretty, fun and action filled with a dash of special effects contrary to the old star trek that was more about moral, embargo, communication and diplomacy/politics and exploring. I guess I wouldn't have liked the movie as much if it was a 2 hour long court trial set on the dark side of Pluto but I did feel that the new movie did sacrifice a lot of thoughtful decisions/questioning/dilemmas just so it could pack in more fast action. cue`s to old trek. Red shirt. Uhuras earpiece. Scotty`s line, Checov`s lines are also made to distract the fans while the movie is slowly going in another direction.

That being said the pacing in this movie is spot on. You are rarely bored or left wandering. The movie holds your hand all the time and guides you. This is kind my problem with the movie.. There where nothing other then what was happeing on the screen. The universe seemed small and not big or wast at the older films have been. This might be due to new time line that JJ. is creating. Ile get back to this..

"The bridge" kinda looks like a apple store if you ask me

At first the characters looked completely wrong and way to young to represent the new generation of trekkers. More like underwear models then serious actors, but given time they do kinda grow on you.

Chris Pine (Kirk) was to me a big help in the movie since he first came out as a young, relative unknown actor that looked like he belonged in a "final destination"/"high school/get laid" movie as the stupid bully jock. But, boy was I proven wrong. He didn't blow my mind or anything but he did give the movie the stage presence that was needed and he was a really good Kirk. He based his performance on Tom Cruise's "Maverick" and Harrison Ford's "Han Solo" and "Indiana Jones", heroes who Pine felt possessed the archetypal hero qualities Kirk has (humor, arrogance, decisiveness) and it totally worked in my book. I was afraid that he would just rip off shatner but he proved me wrong. His chemistry with Spock also worked really well

Spock in this movie was far more interesting then the rest of the cast. (except for Simon pegg that is) He was really the most "human" of the crew as he was torn between the whole half human/Vulcan issue. His story arc was one of the more interesting ones as well. and he was wonderfully entertaining to watch

I was really glad to see Leonard Nimoy as "Ol Spock" That to me, liftet the movie up to the "trek" that I know.. I thought that having him in there ensured a lot of fans not to totally hate the movie. Also JJ. properly dident have to give him much direction since Nemoy IS spock in that sense. It was just a joy to see.

Pine was great as the captain and the only one that really carried any authority. I would have wanted to see more of him

The only characters that I thought tried a little to hard was Checov and Sulu.
Checov to me is a really great character since he kinda stands out from the crowd in the old ones. (plus he is scary as hell as the Psi-Core leader in Babylon 5) In this one he had way to little to really say and looked way to young to have such a important role on the ship (as jocked within the movie) He also made transporting look difficult instead of the whole "onetwothreebuttonpush" the old ones had. (despite his screens made no sense at all during this)

Sulu wasen`t an important character in this movie so I dont have much to say about him. I was dreading the "harold&kumar" look and wibe, that I associate him with but he did for the most part stay out of the movie.

Uhura was build up to be something big in this movie but ultimately served as a toy between Spock and Kirk. The first Uhura was a really important icon in television history as she was the first black female in on tv. The new Uhura had little to say and was just "goggling" Spock. At least she was easy on the eyes..

The only character that I felt was severly under-used was Simon Pegg as cheif enginer Scotty. Im only saying this because I love everything Simon is in (despite whoring himself out to America lately with movies such as: How to Lose Friends & Alienate People, Big Nothing, and Mission: Impossible III) I have a huge man-crush on Simon from his early days in "Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz, Big train, Asylum and SPACED" and I wish that the entire movie was about him.. but sadly he was put there to pick up the comedic pace since everyone else was crying and whining. His accent was spot on for the average American moviegoer as they can identify him as "somwhere irelandyish" He did the best he can with what he got and can only blame (if any) JJ. for not giving him more back story and meat in the movie. He was sort of just squeezed into the plot to give audience a homage to Scotty and in order to somehow get Kirks character back on the ship.

Then there is Nero. The "villain" of the movie. This has got to be one of the weakest villains in a long time. (General Grievous on second place) To me he was more a disgruntled miner blinded by rage. It had a sort of "The Postman" feel to it. He was just a guy caught in the wrong place at the wrong time. Eric bana did a good role with that that was given to him. Maybe he wasn't supposed to be a big villain like Khan or feared or something but he just came out as wrong. His henchman was more scary then Nero. Apparently IDW published a comic prequel series entitled "Star Trek: Countdown" that fleshed out Nero's back story and the reasons for Old Spock's involvement but if you have to publish a comic besides the movie inorder to get everything in place, isent that a sign of something? I did however like the fact that Nero was so blinded by rage that he dissident travel back to Romulus to tell people that they only had 150 years to fix this issue, or abandon the planet. He just waited.. Now thats bad ass!



I talked earlier about JJ. taking Trek into new territories. This especially since they destroyed Vulcan in this one and did not fix it before the end. I was sure that they where going to use the time warp factor or something. I don't really have a relationship with the old cast or history so this docent really bother me as much as it might do with some fans. When Nero went back in time...he created a NEW alternate reality. So now everything from the old star trek is preserved in another reality/dimension. While this reality can be FULL of surprises. Its a kool take and makes trek more new in many ways since they can really do what ever they want. Another sign of this is Spock and Uhura love affair. I didn't really care since it was only really put there to further the chemistry between Kirk and Spock.

Another thing I found really interesting me was how much Star Wars is in Star Trek. Think about it. Kirk is a a farm boy, Nero as Darth Vader, Pike as Obiwan ken obi. Its more of a heroes journey then the diplomatic quest, Ice planet with monsters?. All the way up to the end scene where they get medals. Cue fanfare. just a funny observation thats all

Also the chain of command is really screwed up in this one. Kirk gets back the the ship and immediately starts dissing Spock in-order to get a reaction out of him. Spock snaps off-course and gets towed of the brig while Kirk is promoted Captain. What happened there? Docent this show that Kirk is the ultimate bully and not really fit to run the ship? Clearly Spock was more right for this. While all the others are just staring at them bickering. It just seemed weird

The effects that ILM whipped up are incredible. Rarely has the Enterprise seemed so nimble and mobile yet dangerous at the same time. Theres monsters hissing, monitors bleeping and ships blowing up.. plus a planet or two. (funny since ILM is a lucas created company) My biggest consern is the over-use of lensflare. Ile admit that this does give the movie a "state-of-the-art/scifi" look but it was a little distractin when there is really nothing that suggest lensflare on the screen. Sun in space? Ok. Indoors in a bedroom? Slightly stretching it... The lensflare was there in MI3 as well, maybe to build it up or something.. Not sure about Cloverfield though.

Ile end here.

All in all. JJ`s Star Trek is not your fathers Star Trek. Its fast, stupid and action filled. I had hoped for more thought then simple action but it does work reasonably well. Hopefully they will address this in the sequel that is bound to come. Its a good ride and fun at the same time. Its easily forgotten and a fine reboot of the series. Heres hoping for Worf and Data in that one.

7/10

Labels: movie review

Its been a while but Im back with a new review. This time is the new newest Indy movie.



Plot: During the Cold War, Soviet agents watch Professor Henry Jones when a young man brings him a coded message from an aged, demented colleague, Henry Oxley. Led by the brilliant Irina Spalko, the Soviets tail Jones and the young man, Mutt, to Peru. With Oxley's code, they find a legendary skull made of a single piece of quartz. If Jones can deliver the skull to its rightful place, all may be well; but if Irina takes it to its origin, she'll gain powers that could endanger the West. Aging professor and young buck join forces with a woman from Jones's past to face the dangers of the jungle, Russia, and the supernatural..

So the first time I heard anything about this movie was (as propebly most people thought) the age thing. Harrison is pushing 60 now and the last movie was 16 years ago. The other thing was that there was no real point of a remake. I loved the fact that Spielberg and Lucas would team up again. But as the last 10 years of remaking has shown, the genius of hollywood have completely washed out the original thought-provocing storys and makes the movie for a bigger and younger crowd. (Like Die hard-4, the Invasion, I am legend etc)



Well, luckely the age of Indy has not been tamperd with. Sure, Shia (mutt) takes over a lot of the jumpy/running action but Ford does his share as well and he does it well. And it was a treat to see. He gets a lot of beating and throws alot of punches which gave me a nostalgic feel, and its also just s treat to see Ford back with the whip and fedora.

The plot however is completly retarded. Im not going to spoil it but it revolves around aliens.. (yeah, thats right)

My biggest gripe with the movie was that there was never any real danger in this movie. Waterfalls, fireants, collapsing temple, russians. You never ever felt that the gang where in peril. They where just happy and getting along well. I mean Indy is all about exploring and danger! Even the chase across the cliff side was unbareble to watch since its so clearly fake. Dont get me wrong. The sequence is nicely done and all that, but it goes on way to long and is just completly over-the-top cg. Thats another thing about Indy four. Spielberg and Lucas repeatedly said that they where going back to "the old school" way of effect-making and whats the first thing you see on the big screen? A computer generated Gopher! It was only there for 10 seconds but that was enough for me to set the mood. The movie also gave me the feeling of being shoot at a soundstage. It had a green-screen feeling and was completely fake. The old ones was shot on location and hard manual labour. This one is to clean looking and just lacks realisme



Also Indy never tries to trick the enemy or throw them off (the russians in this case) Infact he leads them directly to the "treasure". It just totally destroyd the enemy arcs since Indy was best buds with them and helping them almost all the way. It just stripped the movie of all danger and interest. There is no character arcs at all. At the end. Indy is still Indy. Cutesy Marion is still cutesy Marion. "Greaser" Mutt is still "Greaser" Mutt, and Kate Blanchetts character is introduced as a powerhungry mindreader but it doesent go anywhere. Also the story is all over place and alot of characters where a waste such as Ray Winstone, John Hurt and Jim Broadbent. Such great actors in such small insignificant roles.

All in all. Indy is a fun movie, but the whole premise of the movie is completely bonkers. Its not nowhere near the standard of the old ones and there is no scenes that sticks out like they do in the old ones. Boat out of plane? Traps? Boulders? Casino shootout? Lavapit? Minecart racing? Monkey-brain soup?. I dont remember any scenes in the new one. Indy four feels more like fun reunion of old characters with a script that goes nowhere..

Im going back to see the old ones now...

4/10

Labels: movie review

I saw the movie Jumper last week, and although the premise was solid and could have been more explored, the whole thing felt wasted and I left a bit empty



Plot Outline:
A genetic anomaly allows a young man to teleport himself anywhere. He discovers this gift has existed for centuries and finds himself in a war that has been raging for thousands of years between "Jumpers" and those who have sworn to kill them.

Yes, its hayden "Manikin skywalker", yes its a effects movie. I still had somewhat high hopes for it since it had such a cool consept. A consept that I myself have been intrested in some time now, unfortunately the movie dosent even touch upon it. I couldent care less if the gang lived or died, I was there to watch the effects and see what all this was about. After a near death experience David Rice (Hayden) finds out that he can teleport/jump to a to another location. The rule is that he can only teleport to places that he can see and have been before. Apparently when he was drowning he though of the school library since that is where he first teleports.

The movie then jumps forward in a happy 80s music montage with him stealing money from a bank and living life to the fullest in a 8 by 5 meter shitdorm in a downtown sentral room for rent. How a 15 year old kid manages to rent a room in quite possibly dangerous area of New york, is beyond me. The reception clerk is only concerned that he dosent do any "funny business" and pay each month. Fair nuff

The movie skips forward about 5-10 years? We now see David living life in a sweet batchlor pad in NY with walls covered with pictures of places his gone too and they serve as a "jump spots" for him if he ever wants to stretch his legs.

Here comes the beste scene in the movie. David is bored and sits down to watch telly when he realises that the remote is to far away from him, so he uses his godlike powers to jump closer to the remote at the other end of the sofa, then starts flicking the channels. He stops for a brief moment at some flood victims trapped on a house. A superhero would be all over the situation and helped out the poor people but no, not our david. He smirks and instead jumps over to the frige to get some milk. That whole scene was briliant and I might have been the only one in the theater who laught out loudly. It really was a character defineing moment. Sadly this was the only moment in the movie that carryed some weight. He is really a whiny jerk ever since the flood scene. I guess thats his acting niche (episode 2-3, Shatterd glass, Life as a House)

Then for no apparent reason, motherfucker Samuel L. Jackson appers sporting a white dye hairpice and apparently he`s had it with these motherfucker jumpers. Why? We dont know. All we are left with is that they have been killing jumper since the the medival times becuase they are voialating god`s will. I did find it ironic that the "christian villans" retrieve the Jumpers by using their powers, then persecute them for being unholy. And apparently the whole Paladin vs Jumpers concept was never in the original story/book.

Then there was another jumper who was catching on to david`s powers. His role was completly bonkers since he followed david for about 20 minutes of the movie, calling him names from a distance in his snooty british accent. Then when David tries to make contact with him, he totally reverses role`s and went like: What do you want from me..? Who are you? Leave me alone! It dident make any sense.

The love interest was called Millie ("played" by Rachel Bilson) Her character was completely retarded. Her entire role was just going "hey talk to me hey hey talk to me" and why david felt that he had to hide his awesome powers for here also dident come across very well. It was just all just poorly developed. The same goes with the bully. Altough I liked his character since he was just so completely over the top

All in all its a silly no-brainer of a popcorn movie. I had to high hopes. Its got action and snappy effects, thats what you get. Story is almost non-present and the consept remains untouched. And Hayden still cant act.

4/10

Labels: movie review

Plot: The year is 2012. New York City has become a desolate place. There are no signs of human life. All that remains are empty buildings, abandoned cars and the city that once never slept, is a decaying shell. However, one man remains. His name is Dr. Robert Neville and his is the sole survivor of a disease that wiped out 90% of mankind. Neville spends his days patrolling New York, hunting deer, playing golf, waiting for survivors who have heard the message he sends out at all times, and basically fending off the madness that can set in when you have no interaction with another human in any way. However, despite being the only human left in New York, Neville is not alone. The disease has changed those who aren’t immune into vampiric mutants, unable to emerge from darkness during the day. Neville searches for a cure for these mutants while they do their best to hunt him down

First a little info about the origin of the movie:

"I Am Legend is a 1954 science fiction novel by Richard Matheson about the last man alive in a future Los Angeles overrun with vampires. Notable as influential on the developing modern zombie genre, in popularizing the fictional concept of a worldwide apocalypse due to disease, and in exploring the notion of vampirism as a disease. The novel was a success, and was adapted to film as The Last Man on Earth in 1964, as The Omega Man in 1971, and again in 2007 as I Am Legend." - wiki

Without giving too much away, in the novel, Neville is a man without purpose who hits rock bottom and finds a way back. He gains a purpose in his life and because of this purpose, he eventually becomes what the title says, a legend. The vampires of the book form a new society. Neville hunts them while they sleep. Ultimately, in a twist on the original vampire premise, Neville becomes a monster to them. He becomes their Dracula. Their legend sort to speak. It’s a brilliant idea that’s completely lost in this remake.



I am legend could have been so much better. The first twenty minutes or so, are extremey tense and very promising. After that the movie quickly becomes clichéd and ultimately pointless. They have written a new ending since the first one they showed the public did not impress them very much. In the first version of "IAL" the infected surrounds Robert and co. Robert lets the Alfa female go inorder for safe passage to the colony which they get. The new ending is completely bonkers and a cristian faith theme is making it unbarable to watch. (it was like watching signs again) It feels rushed and "safe" in hollywood terms.

Will Smiths acting is ok. I would have liked to see more humor and mad moments since he seemed a bit to calm for someone thats been alone 3 years but he is suprisingly calm and collected. He should have taken a few more liberties with his surroundings

Visually the movie looks great. They have done a great job of displaying New York as if it was abandoned, not destroyed (which was a first for these types of movies) Wildlife has moved into the city again, with birds, deer and lions roamed about. Would be nais to see more animals in this movie. (like in 12 monkeys)

The most irritating aspect of the movie is that the mutants Neville is fighting are completely CGI. And they look in no way scary or menacing. They where supposed to go with real people like in 28 days later/day of the dead but inorder to get them to move in a certain way they opped to go completely for CG which is a shame. Once you get a full one look one of them, they look laughable and cheap. Some scenes work but they end up looking like extras from "The Mummy". I also read that they where suppose to have translucent skin so that the light could shine trough their skin reveling bones but this I failed to see. Their animations was also suppose to make they fast, inhuman and agile but this also failed to register since it was for the most part motion capture of real people just speeded up (this rarely looks good and this was the case as well) When is hollywood going to learn? Now their animations where so fast at times, they had no anitcipation nor proper timing making it pointless to build suspence.



"While it would have meant that the mutants weren’t as agile as they are in the film, it would have been a FAR better idea to use actors in make up. As they are, the mutants are just cgi monsters that have no shred of humanity and thus are stripped of any emotional connection to the audience, be that connection empathy or even fear"

It`s a shame that this movie is such a disappointment. Had they stayed with the source material from the novel it would have made a brilliant, deep movie with a interesting plot and a instant classic. Instead we are left with something that feels rushed and not even remotely scary and at the core. Pointless

4/10

Labels: movie review

Funny thing this movie is...

I first saw it at Frogner kino (cinema)for free since it was work-related and I left feeling pissed off that someone could produce such a high polished piece of turd. The characters, story, design, editing, music, dialogue where down right bad! The characters where straight out of the cliche-book. With the main character Sam basicly being a horny teenager caught in the middle of it all with the uber hot girl with a "bad" rep and the over-the-top John Turturro as sector 7`s head honcho. The personalites of the robots came out of the blue for me and where more a comic relif then dangerous metal killerbots.(funky breakdancing robot?) I guess the bots had to have "feelings and opinions" so that we can relate to them as characters, not just wired junk metal on stereoids bashing each others hardware out. I should have seen it comming with the second robot character we meet was extremly innoing and reminded me of something they ditched in Star wars, episodes 1-3. I havent watched the "old" show so I dident know they where going to be so personal and charismatic. Music was another issue. The classical score worked while some of the pop songs feelt like it was trying to hard to be modern and for the kiddies. Hearing Linking park 30 times in the movie is too much for anyone..

Even some of the effects werent on par. It might have something to do with the fact that to many bits and pieces moved at the same time. Apparently it took approximately 38 hours for the animators at Industrial Light & Magic to render one frame of the CGI animation to portray the Transformers. I mean, is it really necessary to have motion on more pices then the human-eye can register? It would be a lot cooler if there where like big chunks of gears and metalbits that made sense when it was re-arranging and in general motion. I guess that would just have taken to much time to assemble so they insted went with the "porridge" solution. So imagine 10108 moving bits and pices on Prime for a 5 second transformation clip and throw in motion blur and zoom. It was just messy.


The next day I watched it at Coloseum cinema with 8-9 friends of mine. Most of them where there to gaze upon the spectacular effects. We sit down after providing some much needed soda and popcorn. I look around myself. Mostly guys in 25-35 age. 2% female apperance. The movie starts. Optimus Prime speaks his opening monologe. What the deuce? People are cheering. Must be some really die hard fans I guess. The logo "TRANSFORMERS" appers and people start to clap and cheer some more. Even stading up yelling.. Did I miss the free designer drug at the entrance? The movie continues. The hint of story I allready know so I got real comfy in the chair, keeping a eye out for details and goofs thinking: poor suckers, dont know whats going to hit them. Halfway through the movie, Im smiling. Im actully enjoying this. The characters now sort of make sense and the dialog has a much better flow. The effects fucking rocks! Transformation are flawless and the integration between live actors and cg was perfect at times. Even the design of the bots has finally embedded it self in my scull and Optimus never looked so good. The movie ends to linking park and people are giving it a standing ovation! Hussa!

There are still some dialog that are completely out of order and feel really tacked on. And some advertising screentime such as the "mountain dew dispenser machine" and 360 bot really feels like a quick sponsor deal. Also the shere size of the robots amounted to extremely little destruction. Blackout (the chopper in the beginning) deals out more destruction in 5 min then all of the robots at the end.w00t?! There is a 15 minute fight in the street downtown that (despite some massive set piece destruction by Megatron chasing Sam and fighting Prime) all looks like its happening in the same street. + Its rated PG-13 so there is a lack of people dieing. I know that its not the Transformers way of doing stuff but I mean, when your taking the one thing that all the bots want downtown, your kinda asking for it.

For what the original tvshow was, Bay has done a tremendous job of bringing it to the silver screen. I mean this is what he had to go from: http://youtube.com/watch?v=fB0_vJUc3o4 (maybe not the best example but you get the picture..) They should have spendt more time on building up the robot-characters but this beeing a franchise the next movie is propably allready in early production

Here is a review that I can relate most with:
http://movies.ign.com/articles/800/800501p1.html

from IGN - June 29, 2007 -

Labels: movie review