Save the $10. Catch "Final Destination" on cable.
I watched the original Japanese version on cable and yet I still allowed myself to be dragged to this crap. That's 3+ hours of my life I'll never get back.
Saturday, January 26, 2008
Rambo 4 stars out of 5
My oh my....just when I thought Starship Troopers was the most violent picture I would ever see. The 4th Rambo installment is about as violent as a movie can get. Written, directed by and starring Sylvester Stallone, Rambo recycles the plot from Rambo:First Blood Part II. Substitute Missionary's for POW's and you have the same movie, only this one is on HGH.
Using the 60 year long and counting civil war in Burma/Myanmar as a backdrop, the Government troops commit such atrocities, you just can't wait to see them get their due. Rambo does not disappoint. By the time John Rambo settles in behind the 50 caliper machine gun with almost unlimited ammo, you WANT him to kill everything that moves.
Stallone plays Rambo as a man of even fewer words than in the past films. He uses his "thousand mile stare" effectively. His interaction with hired mercenaries is entertaining, because we know who he is, and the mercenaries have not a clue.
From what you've read so far, you might get the feeling that I did not like this film.....and you'd be wrong. The movie has its problems, but it delivers exactly what you expect going in. The action is intense and you're rooting for the good guys through out. By the time the carnage ended, there was applause from the audience (I'm not sure what drives that, I have never felt the need to clap at the end of a movie, no matter how good it was or how happy I was that it was finally over).
If you liked Rambo: First Blood Part II and extreme violence does not bother you, then you will have a good time watching Rambo.
One last thought..let's give Stallone some credit. He moves really well for a 60 year old guy, and everyone who laughed when he announced he was reviving both Rocky and Rambo, should reconsider..because he pulled them both off. As long as there is no sequel to Rhinestone in the works, I say "good job".
Using the 60 year long and counting civil war in Burma/Myanmar as a backdrop, the Government troops commit such atrocities, you just can't wait to see them get their due. Rambo does not disappoint. By the time John Rambo settles in behind the 50 caliper machine gun with almost unlimited ammo, you WANT him to kill everything that moves.
Stallone plays Rambo as a man of even fewer words than in the past films. He uses his "thousand mile stare" effectively. His interaction with hired mercenaries is entertaining, because we know who he is, and the mercenaries have not a clue.
From what you've read so far, you might get the feeling that I did not like this film.....and you'd be wrong. The movie has its problems, but it delivers exactly what you expect going in. The action is intense and you're rooting for the good guys through out. By the time the carnage ended, there was applause from the audience (I'm not sure what drives that, I have never felt the need to clap at the end of a movie, no matter how good it was or how happy I was that it was finally over).
If you liked Rambo: First Blood Part II and extreme violence does not bother you, then you will have a good time watching Rambo.
One last thought..let's give Stallone some credit. He moves really well for a 60 year old guy, and everyone who laughed when he announced he was reviving both Rocky and Rambo, should reconsider..because he pulled them both off. As long as there is no sequel to Rhinestone in the works, I say "good job".
Saturday, January 5, 2008
The Golden Compass - 3 out of 5 stars
At a cost of over 300 million (budget, prints and advertising), The Golden Compass has only grossed 65M in the U.S.. If not for the 200M it has grossed internationally, it would be a colossal flop. The total gross is still 40M short of the break even point. With DVD revenue, cable and network TV sales, this film will still lose money. Im thinking that pressure from religious groups kept groves of customers away. The feeling being that The Magisterium in the film represents the church and religion vs free will. It's all just posturing by people who have too much time on their hands. Even if that is the author's intention, no youngster is going to put that slant on the movie. With all that is going on visually in the film, you don't need to stop and think.
I start with these facts because the end of The Golden Compass leaves it open to a sequel....a sequel that may never come, unless they can find a way to make a second movie for half the money.
When the most interesting characters in a movie featuring human actors are the CGI characters, the film is in trouble. Nicole Kidman as usual, looks like a porcelain goddess, but her performance is boring. Daniel Craig is on screen for a very short period, I'm thinking he would be featured in the next film. Sam Elliott pops up as a cowboy, proving once again that he was born 40 years too late. If he was in his prime when two out of every three movies was a western, there is no telling how much bigger his career would have been.
All of the CGI characters are top notch at least you can see where most of the money went. The voice over work from Ian McKellen, Ian McShane and others not named Ian, is excellent. In fact, the character I cared about the most was Iorek Byrnison the CGI generated polar bear voiced by Ian McKellen.
To sum this all up, I liked the movie enough to give it 3 out of 5 stars. It held my interest throughout. I did leave the theater less than satisfied by the open ended ending. I really don't like being left on the hook. I don't remember feeling that way at the end of The Chronicles of Narnia (which had religious groups up in arms for just the opposite reasons, there is just no pleasing some folks)
I start with these facts because the end of The Golden Compass leaves it open to a sequel....a sequel that may never come, unless they can find a way to make a second movie for half the money.
When the most interesting characters in a movie featuring human actors are the CGI characters, the film is in trouble. Nicole Kidman as usual, looks like a porcelain goddess, but her performance is boring. Daniel Craig is on screen for a very short period, I'm thinking he would be featured in the next film. Sam Elliott pops up as a cowboy, proving once again that he was born 40 years too late. If he was in his prime when two out of every three movies was a western, there is no telling how much bigger his career would have been.
All of the CGI characters are top notch at least you can see where most of the money went. The voice over work from Ian McKellen, Ian McShane and others not named Ian, is excellent. In fact, the character I cared about the most was Iorek Byrnison the CGI generated polar bear voiced by Ian McKellen.
To sum this all up, I liked the movie enough to give it 3 out of 5 stars. It held my interest throughout. I did leave the theater less than satisfied by the open ended ending. I really don't like being left on the hook. I don't remember feeling that way at the end of The Chronicles of Narnia (which had religious groups up in arms for just the opposite reasons, there is just no pleasing some folks)
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
