The Good: I haven't laughed this hard at Kurt Russell since his Big Trouble in Little China days. Russel makes Stuntman Mike so much fun to ride along with. His lines are perfectly delivered and a dead on mix of humor and insinuated serial killer creepiness that keeps you watching.
Tarantino delivers one of the best "oh my god that was horrible" moments I've seen in quite some time. Kudos Quentin. Well done!
"The Girls" were AWESOME. Zoe Bell, Rosario Dawson, and Tracie Thoms were so kick ass! I'm a sucker for a good girl power moment and these ladies delivered and then some!
The Bad: The choppiness and loss of color and sound that were added to give the "feel" of the true Grindhouse movies of drive-in lore often just made you think that something was wrong with the DVD. This, I'm sure, would have translated better in the theatre.
Over all: Don't go looking for a cinematic masterpiece but go in for a good time and you won't be let down. The movie was fun and as with all of Quentin's work the dialog was fantastic.
The Good: As with Pan's Labyrinth, Guillermo Del Toro's hand can be felt touching this piece. It was beautiful. The colors were rich even in their darkness. The music and sound were crystal clear. The story was solid and the actors always hit their mark.
The Bad: This was billed as a horror movie and it really wasn't scary at all.
Over all: If you liked Lady in the Water then you'll like The Orphanage. I went into this expecting a horror movie. What I got was a beautifully done reinterpretation of the Peter Pan fairy tale. I was not disappointed at all.
The Good: The effects were solid and at times beautiful. Watching this again after years reminded me just how far ahead of it's time this movie actually was.
Harrison Ford - the man, the myth, the legend. Had my first crush on him as Han Solo, couldn't get enough of Indiana Jones - but to me he will always be Rick Deckard. Everything that Keanu Reeves did wrong in translated Philip K. Dick's character for A Scanner Darkly - Ford did right in Blade Runner.
Sean Young is stunning in this movie. She's beautiful and vulnerable and everything Rachael was meant to be.
Oh how I love Rutger Hauer as Roy Batty! Equal parts vicious emotionless killer and thoughtful heart-wrenching poet he embodies everything Roy was meant to be. His final moments in the film are still one of my favorite cinematic moments of the Sci-Fi genre.
I would be amiss to say that I wasn't influenced by Daryl Hannah's Pris. One of the first characters I ever built in City of Heroes was completely based on her interpretation of this role. Sex kitten meets lunatic assassin and played to a tee.
The Bad: Watching it then the soundtrack (done by Vangelis) didn't seem out of place - watching it now the music seems dated and too cheesy for such a solid film.
I don't feel like the location of the movie was clearly explained so it became confusing at times to understand why there was such an Asian influence.
Over all: I loved this film when first I saw it, and I love it even more the second time around. If Scanner failed miserably to interpret a solid novel - the Blade Runner succeeds on all aspects. I have enjoyed many of Ridley Scott's movies but this may be my favorite.
The Good: I enjoyed the book when I read it so of course I enjoyed the story here as well. Philip K. Dick is a brilliant writer so the story is solid.
All three of the auxiliary characters played by Robert Downey Jr. , Woody Harrelson and Rory Cochrane were wonderfully played. They were fun to watch and laugh out loud funny at times which is exactly how I felt about them in the books.
The Bad: The animation was... bothersome. I understand they just filmed the scenes and drew over them but it was like they didn't take the time to line them up correctly half the time so people's faces distorted and moved in ways they shouldn't. This detracted from the film.
I am not a fan of either Keanu Reeves or Winona Rider and this film didn't do anything to help either of them for me. They both seem to always be stilted and non-existent in anything they're a part of. Scanner was no exception. In the book, though addled by drugs, Reeves' character was dynamic and interesting. In the film he was flat and you just didn't care what happened to him. Caring what happened to him was the central emotion of the book. Rider on the other hand was dealt a character who in the book you both sympathized with and despised. In the film you just despised her.
Over all: For me this is another read the book, skip the movie. Or perhaps read the book, skip any scene of the movie that does not include Rory, Woody or Robert.
The Good: Visually it stayed very close to the amazing art that Ben Templesmith brought to the graphic novel. This was important to me because the art was such a huge part of what made the graphic novel so good. It was nice to see that they took Templesmith's interpretation of vampires and brought it to life in 3D.
They didn't play with the story TOO much. But really - this is more a compliment to Steve Niles who wrote the graphic novel than to the movie itself. When I stumbled across the graphic novel I was amazed that someone hadn't come up with the idea before - it seemed too perfect. There ARE places in Alaska that are dark for 30 days solid out of the year. Of course vampires would go there. Of course.
They honestly could not have cast the main vampire (Marlow) any better than with Danny Huston. His mannerisms, the way he spoke, his slightly jarred movement - straight out of the comic and everything that made the illustrated Marlow as intensely creepy as he was translated beautifully onto the screen.
I was so so so so glad they didn't tinker too much with the Trapper (Beau Brower) too much. He was a badass character in the novel, and he was badass in the film. Kudos to Mark Boone Junior for a part played to perfection.
The Bad: I'm sure it's tainted by my dislike of Josh Hartnett, however I felt that The Sheriff came across as both too weak and wishy-washy and as much stronger than the comic had him ever become. There was a delicate balance written into the character that didn't translate from book into film. Whether this is the fault of the actor of the direction I cannot objectively say as I do not like Hartnett as an actor and that could taint my opinion in this case.
I felt like they made Stella (played acceptably by Melissa George) weaker than she was in the comic and less of a force than she should have been. Anyone who read the comic (SPOILER ALERT) knows that the heroine of this story was truly Stella, and yet the movie makes her out to be almost an auxiliary character. I didn't appreciate that at all.
Over All: While there were things I liked, as a whole I felt like this was a piss poor watered down version of an amazing story. The visceral fear and anger and other emotions that were easily brought out by the comic just weren't there for me with the film. I felt that an extreme disservice was done to an amazingly original interpretation of a centuries old vampire tale with this movie. If you want something genuine, read the comic - skip the film.
The plot was strong. Yes it was history mixed with your traditional hero epic - but none the less it was strong, easy to follow, and well written.
Rudy Youngblood was absolutely brilliant as the main character Jaguar Paw. His emotion was tangible and raw. Exactly as it should have been.
Both the main "villains" were also exceptionally good.
The Bad: It was an epic tale, ala The Odyssey and even Braveheart, which made it a little thick at times and perhaps a bit less accessible to the average viewer.
Again - I put this down as a negative ONLY because some people have so many problems with subtitled movies. This movie is subtitled, for me that was not a problem, but if subtitles bug you than this is not the film for you.
Over all: I enjoyed it. For me it was particularly neat because I knew the history that surrounded the story that was being told so my mind was constantly pondering what was going on around the central story in the world at the time.
The Good: I have nothing good to say about this film.
The Bad: Ugh. Maybe it was just me. Other people seem to have liked this film but it was just awful. Bad acting, bad staging, just ugh. It was confusing and disturbing but not in the horror movie disturbing kind of way - in the "there's no need for this" kind of way.
Over all: I rank this right up there with Ichi The Killer. Absolutely no reason to waste your time.
The Good: The opening theme or "The Bond Theme" is GREAT. Chris Cornell style.
Daniel Craig was fantastic as Bond. I haven't been even slightly curious about a Bond film since the Sean Connery days and I'm actually very glad I took the time to watch this one. Whereas Remington Steele, oh wait... I mean Pierce Brosnan, was just cheesy and Timothy Dalton was just bad - Craig is a Bond akin to Connery. Cool, calculating, suave and dare I say sexy - he is exactly what Bond should always be.
Mads Mikkelsen was a fabulous villain. The Bond villains almost seem to take over the films from time to time but Mads was so perfectly balanced against Craig he just became a part of things.
This movie has what may be the most incredible chase scene I have ever seen. Definitely the best chase in a Bond movie. I recognized the "villain" who I'm sure was responsible for much of the scenes staging instantly as Sebastien Foucan, inventor of the sport Free Running. I watched a documentary on him and his sport on the Discovery Channel some time ago and if I was amazed with him then - I am even more impressed now. Even if you don't care for Bond the movie is worth seeing if only for this sequence. It's close to the beginning so you can get through it quick.
The Bad: It's a Bond film, and because it's a Bond film, the plot is extremely predictable. You know who the character set is going to be, you know what's going to happen, you know what the resolution will be. There is very little guessing or surprise involved.
Some of the auxiliary characters aren't as well rounded as you would like for them to be.
Over all: I really enjoyed this movie, and I didn't expect to. It lacked a lot of what I hate about Bond films (the overt sexism, the cheese, the unnecessary and predictable explosions and gadget sequences) and retained everything I did like (the cool bond, the cool villain, the cool soundtrack).
The Good: It was a beautiful movie. The colors were vibrant and the cinematography was spot on.
Great plot - although it was based on historical reality so it's kind of hard to go wrong.
I thought Jim Sturgess, who played Jude, was amazing.
The soundtrack was fantastic. It's Beatles songs we're all familiar with, but covered in a way that is at the very least good and in some cases absolutely fantastic (see Dana Fuchs' cover of Helter Skelter - her voice is AMAZING).
The Bad: It is a musical, but a very accessible one. I felt I needed to put it down as a "negative" only because some people are very turned off by musicals. I would still HIGHLY recommend this film - but just wanted to throw that out there.
Over all: I very much enjoyed this film. I can see why it got so much critical acclaim. It made you feel something genuine, which is a rarity with modern cinema most of the time.
