Share poikkeus's profile
poikkeus
poikkeus's stats
- Review count3
- Helpfulness votes0
- First reviewMarch 30, 2012
- Last reviewMarch 30, 2012
- Featured reviews0
- Average rating3.7
poikkeus's Reviews
Overall rating
3
/
5
Relic
PostedMarch 30, 2012
poikkeus
from San Francisco
Early science fiction and fantasy can be chancy for the filmgoer. You don't see too many Jules Verne books being adapted to film anymore. John Carter tries to buck the trend to present an old-style science fiction/fantasy from the pen of Edgar Rice Burroughs (Tarzan), and the results are mixed.
You can't knock the filmmakers' commitment to the project. John Carter was produced for a reported $150 million dollars, primarily for an assortment of cutting-edge digital effects, with scenes which have hundreds of characters on screen at the same time. Visually, John Carter is often appealing, and there's even an unpredictable twist ending.
Let's not ignore the obvious, though. John Carter is closer to pulp than you might want to admit, and the sci-fi devices won't be convincing for anyone but the very young and impressionable. The only familiar actor is Willem Dafoe - and he's the voice of an alien. The logical flaws are so rampant that the film wisely decides to ignore them.
John Carter is a film you want to love, but it's embarrassing more often then it should be.
No, I do not recommend this movie.
Share:
0points
0of 0voted this as helpful.
Overall rating
5
/
5
A winner
PostedMarch 30, 2012
poikkeus
from San Francisco
This academy award winner for best film is so atypical. It's the first foreign film to be chosen as a best film. It's black and white, and silent. But The Artist is more than a tribute to silent films; it tells the story of passing tastes and fashions - and how they can, with love, have more enduring values.
It would have been so easy for The Artist to devolve into a stylistic exercise. To its credit, it's also quite witty and enjoyable - unlike Hugo, which was released at about the same time. Hugo expresses its affection for vintage film with a leaden narrative, almost as if you have to like them; The Artist is lovable like a familiar film.
Yes, I recommend this movie.
Share:
0points
0of 0voted this as helpful.
Overall rating
3
/
5
Overrated
PostedMarch 30, 2012
poikkeus
from San Francisco
No question, Hunger Games has credible performances and a challenging concept - but it's also overlong and not very credible - even from the standards of speculative fiction.
I have no problem with the plot pitting one teen against another; it's been done often, on all sorts of levels, throughout books and film. But Hunger Games is no Lord of the Flies. Some apocalyptic films seem dated after a few years - and a few are embarrassing even now (e.g.,John Carter). Hunger Games falls in the latter category too easily. The near future with dyed poodle hair-cuts comes too close to self-parody.
Jennifer Lawrence is natural and appealing in the lead, and Woody Harrelson offers another strong, diverse role. But compared to the film version of Lord of the Flies - or even Battle Royale - The Hunger Games comes across as half-baked. Unless, of course, you're a fan of Suzanne Collins' books.
No, I do not recommend this movie.
Share:
0points
0of 0voted this as helpful.