Jeremy Brett was the perfect Sherlock Holmes in years past and I missed his reserve in this film. But reserve is not a Guy Ritchie attribute. That said, the bromance between Holmes and Watson was cute, and the women were good foils for the men. I am a chemist, so the science is important, and exaggerated in this film. Shakespeare in Romeo & Juliet relied on a death potion for Juliet, but that was 400 years ago. So I thought the plot was weak. Was the movie entertaining? Yes. The special effect crews earned their money. But all in all I would rate the film a bit more than average, 3-1/3 stars.
I saw this twice over the weekend in IMAX 3D and really recommend that format. The film impresses because of all the little details captured and the "reality" of all the digital animation. The motion capture is way beyond Lord of the Rings. Kudos to Mr. Cameron. Please start working NOW on the two sequels mentioned in todays NY Times!
Being a ga'y man in 1962, "light in his loafers," according to a neighbor, George (Firth) is not allowed to go to his 16-year partner Jim's (Goode) funeral and has trouble coping with his loss. The book A Single Man in its day was groundbreaking. This film is less so, but the use of color intensity to gauge George's "pulse" is unique. You can drown in his student Kenny's (Hoult) blue eyes. Moore as Charley, his confidante, is Oscar material.
What a collection of plausible, zaney characters! This is a British film that reminds me of the cult film Withnail and I -- and the song A Whiter Shade of Pale plays a part in both films. Bill Nighy is good in Pirates of the Caribbean but even better on this pirate ship. Philip Seymour Hoffman is perfect in this role, yet so different from his many other persona. In a few things the screenplay goes beyond the reasonable: A guy shows up for breakfast who has been on the ship for 8 months and no one knows who he is? The last name of the guy out to get the pirates, whether or not it ends in two Ts? If you liked Death at a Funeral you will LOVE this film.
Everyone does a fantastic job here, and the results are shocking. It is not a pleasant movie but it is very real. Since I live in the Bronx everything seemed eerily familiar. If there are not several Oscar nominations here I will be very surprised. However, the titles and credits were, to me, unreadable, and for that reason I took away one star.
Angels & Demons accelerates from the very first frame and does not quit for over two hours. That is a good thing, all things considered, and there are twists and turns along the roads around Rome and the Vatican, but at the end not a lot has been accomplished. Since I am a scientist, the whole "antimatter bomb" thing is totally impossible, but it LOOKS possible, so I guess it all works. Good entertainment well worth the money.
Wow, what a film! Everything is so well done: the acting, the special effects, the story. Bringing Spock I into the same time frame as Spock II (or is it the other way around?) took a bit of creating imagining, but it all works. The young Kirk looks a bit scrawny relative to the adult, but who cares? I saw the regular version as well as the digital projection IMAX version and recommend the IMAX, though maybe there is a bit of pixelation in the rapid motion sequences.
Wow, what a film! Everything is so well done: the acting, the special effects, the story. Bringing Spock I into the same time frame as Spock II (or is it the other way around?) took a bit of creating imagining, but it all works. The young Kirk looks a bit scrawny relative to the adult, but who cares? I saw the regular version as well as the digital projection Imax version and recommend the Imax, though there is a bit of pixelation in the rapid motion sequences.
Since I was not familiar with the graphic novel it took a while to adjust to the presentation, but in the end I was not bothered by the violence or the length. From what I have read. except for the first scenes, it is pretty true to the original In the end it all made sense. The nudity fit the plot, but there is male super-hero nudity for those bothered by it. The CGI was extraordinary, though maybe not up to ILM standards. I give the film a big thumbs up.
Having become familiar with Dev Patel in the teen BBC series Skin (where he plays a devout Muslim kid tempted by sex and booze) I was not surprised with his excellent lead performance as Jamal in this film, though two younger boys play his role early in the film. What with the Mumbai attacks in recent days, India has been in the news, but the portrayal of the slum origins of Jamal and his brother are quite startling to see. You get a tour of India in the flashback shots explaining how Jamal can answer questions on the Millionaire game show despite his lack of an education. A fascinating film, and one of the year's best.