Change Your Image
Wraith8677
Reviews
The Departed (2006)
Decent convoluted mob movie
Parents send your kids elsewhere; we are here to talk about, "The Departed," the Academy Award winning movie directed by none other than the great Martin Scorsese. I won't spend a lot of time explaining the movie because it will take longer than actually watching the movie itself.
But it involves DiCaprio's character graduating from the Massachusetts Police Academy and becoming the Boston Police Department's, "mole" in investigating the Irish mob, run by Nicholsan. While at the same time Nicholsan sends Damon through the Police Academy to become his informant in the Boston Police Department. Things escalate when both Damon and DiCaprio become aware of each others presence and are ordered to uncover the other one's identity. Don't be fooled this is one movie that is VERY hard to follow if you are not paying immense attention. It is filled with double-crosses, triple-crosses, and I think there was a quadruple-cross at one point.
It's filled with big named celebrities that you are well acquainted with. And there talents are well used. The story on the other hand seems rushed at times and appears it would have benefited more had it been spread out on two movies as opposed to cramming it all on one. But the thing that's confusing is that Mark Wahlberg was nominated for an Oscar, but he's only in about five scenes and isn't even the main focus, his character is completely forgettable up till the very end.
And as far as how this movie wraps up, pretty much, everyone dies. Yep, be careful not to blink or else you'll miss someone getting killed. At the end I looked to my friend and asked, "Did they just kill-off the entire cast in five minutes?"
Despite these pitfalls, the movie is still solid, it's directed wonderfully, and Scorsese deserves his Oscar. The acting is top notch, and the atmosphere and the characters and the story (as long as you are paying attention) keeps you until the very end. And the "F-word" is used 237 times, how cool is that? I just wished the movie didn't leave me wanting more. And even though the movie did very well and won many awards, it won't be on the minds of people for very long.
So I give The Departed a 3 out of 5.
Transformers (2007)
Possibly the best movie of the year?
G1 fans gather together and drag your whole families out of their houses and take them to the theater RIGHT NOW! Because it's Transformers time! The long awaited live-action incarnation of your favorite cartoon is here. And some of your favorite Autobots and Decepticons have come from Cybertron to destroy and protect you. This is by-far one of the best movies of the year, no actually, in a couple of years. If you've ever wanted a movie that blends live-acting with CGI it is Transformers. As far as the look and feel of the movie you actually believe that these robots are walking around on a real set. You are drawn into the characters, (both human and machine) and even more into the fight scenes.
The first half of the movie is very heavy in dialog and surrounds the humans for the most part. While the Transformers part is very fast paced and will raise your blood pressure to the point you want to jump out of your seat cheering. The human cast is made up of actors you all know and love, and Shia (who is mostly a sidekick in other movies, I Robot, Constantine) adds this movie to the growing list of awesome movies he has been involved in. All the human actors are unique and bring something to the movie. The Transformers also bring the action and effects that top this film off as one of the best movies ever. All of the Autobots are unique and have very different personalities that are tied up with Optimus Primes' grand and wise presence. Though the film really focuses on Optimus and Bumblebee, but those are the most beloved Autobots out of the bunch so it doesn't mater too much. The Decepticons on the other hand, though they outnumber the Autobots receive very little screen time with the exception to the end. The Decepticons that received more attention was Barricade, Scorpinok, and Frenzy. Megatron, though he emits a dark presence in the background appears very late in the film, BUT what he lacks in screen time he more than makes up in shear destruction of anything in his way. From tearing an Autobot in half, to flying Optimus through a building, to kicking a human twenty feet into a car. Magatron's appearance is simply horrific and terrifying. The fighting between robots and humans in pure ecstasy, and will impress even the hardcore action fans.
"Well Brad, is there anything else you'd like to add before wrapping it up?"
Yes, thank you Michael Bay (and Steven Spielberg) for giving us such a great movie that people will be talking about all year, and if things go well,(Like the Transformers toy and TV series) maybe even for generations to come. That is why I give Transformers a perfect 5, out of 5.
Spider-Man 3 (2007)
Spider-Man trips and falls with a terrible script but still manages to succeed.
Here we go boys and girls it's the incredible, the fantastic, the amazing Spider-Man! The first was great and the second, despite almost everyone's oppositions to any and all sequels, dominated overall. Now Tobey McGuire, Kirsten Dunst, and James Franco have returned to fulfill their obligations to Spider-Man 3, it says so in their contracts. The greatest Spider-Man film yet!...or so we're told. Yet after watching Spider-Man3 It took me a good long while, three days in fact, to decide whether or not I liked it.
In the end I liked it, but not in the traditional sense. It's more along the lines of having a best friend for years and finding out that they didn't invite you to a party, I mean you still like them but you feel betrayed.
That's what Spider-Man 3 is like and what is the one single factor that takes the Slinger out of Web-Slinger? The script.
Yep the script is bi-polar, its dark and depressing one second and bright cheery for the next ten minutes. Yep, that's a balanced tone for a movie. This was painfully obvious where in a scene with Peter and MJ they are breaking up, Peter is fine in one shot and then is sobbing in the next. What? He's already crying? No build up to tears like all other humans? Hmm, I guess Peter Parker is Bi-polar too.
As a side note Mary Jane gets kidnapped AGAIN, she glorifies the fact that no girl should, under any circumstances, date a super hero. So girls if you are dating a super hero break it off now, your only going to be kidnapped and set up as bait for him.
Also the movie asks a lot from the audience in terms of feelings of remorse when it comes to Harry Osbourn, when he first attacks Peter (great missed opportunity for his Spidey-sense to go off BTW) he hits his head and is unconscious, we see him in the ER and at first it looks like he may die. People in the theater are sniffling for him hoping it isn't true, it isn't. Yet a few for more scenes later he fights Peter again and is "Blown up" by a pumpkin bomb, OK now Harry must be dead he was hit with a BOMB. So we conjure up our feelings of sympathy one more time but no, believe it or not he's still alive. Now you get the feeling that the movie is pointing and laughing at you saying, "Haha made ya cry!" So at the end when Harry final does die, you've already cried over his "death" twice that you just don't care that he's finally dead.
Now for other things thats wrong here is not only the villains but the casting decisions for them. I have nothing against Topher Graces he's a fine actor but I can't look at him and not see Eric Foreman, I almost expected Red to come out behind Topher saying, "I'm gonna put my foot in your ass!" Despite my disagreement having Sandman in the film I ended up liking him somehow, he was a different kind of criminal, he actually put his daughter before himself.
Harry/ New Goblin as he's called, because i guess Hobgoblin was already taken, looks cool but he pretty much flies on a turbine engine snowboard.
Venom, the one villain everybody wanted over all only makes an appearance the last 25 minutes. Reasons for this is that the Venom back story is very long. In fact had they done everything leading up to venom it would easily fill out two movies, but fans wanted Venom and so he was written in at the last second and then is killed off after 25 minutes of air time. Bye bye Venom, the greatest Spider-Man super villain doesn't get more than a half hour appearance because Sandman is more important.
Now I'm sure your wondering, Dude you sound like you hated this, what's up? Well like I said I don't, despite everything I said I was still entertained by the action sequences the dark undertones, and finally a good cameo by Stan Lee. But it's all weighed down by a terrible script that Stan Lee himself wouldn't approve of.
Even with all of this Spider-Man 3 is still one of the most grossing movies of the year, so a lot of people still liked it. I can only hope that Spider-Man 4 which is unlikely to have the same cast (we all know how well those kinds of movies do wink-wink) gives us a better script that we could get interested in. So my score for Spider-Man 3 is, 3 highly successful movies out of 5.
Blade: Trinity (2004)
One word. "Why?"
Before I tell you about Blade: Trinity let me first tell you about the first one. Blade is popularly believed to be the catalyst for the Marvel movie franchise. Avi Arad is the man responsible for giving us our favorite comic book movies, Spider-Man, X-Men, etc. Blade set the first standard for comic book movies until Spider-Man increased it. Blade II came with rather remarkable success, it gave us more of what we wanted: a closer look at the vampire culture and the inner turmoil between vampires, an engaging storyline, and incredible action/ fight sequences. With that said let's move onto Blade: Trinity.
First let's start with the title, Blade:Trinity? Why couldn't they call it Blade III? Instead it's called Trinity because we now have three vampire hunters (Snipes, Beil, Reynolds) however, Beil and Reynolds are more like sidekicks of Snipe's and are their characters are more animated than realistic. To suggest that these two other characters are Blade's equals is laughable at best.
Next is the casting, most noticeably are the "Nightstacker's" buddies, technicians, or people you just don't care about. First if Patton Oswalt is in a movie, don't waste time thinking about going to see it. Plus some of the characters jobs are completely illogical, for example why would you have a blind woman watch the surveillance monitors?! And how do these "20 somethings" have access to technology that far exceeds that of anything available to the world? Fortunately the movie doesn't take any time for the audiences to get to know these one dimensional characters and only focuses on Snipes, Beil, Reynolds.
Next the script, the writing is so bad I wondered if the actors had actual lines or just said whatever came first in their heads. There are more curse words than coherent dialogue in this film, and it seems that if an actor couldn't remember a line that they simply yelled out curse words. Reynolds is the biggest offender of this.
Next is the story, Vampires using the FBI to help capture Blade? Well I guess it makes sense, after-all if immortal vampires can't capture Blade I'm sure a bunch of frail humans could. And summoning Dracula to fight Blade, was the most ridiculous part of all. I wonder what that vampire meeting was like.
"We need to kill Blade, any suggestions?"
"Dracula! He'll kill him for sure!"
"Brilliant! Here's a cookie!"
"YAY"
Huh...well...that was odd, anyway. Now for the biggest problem of all, the directing. The sorest part are the fight scenes, I bet the fighting would look awesome if I could see it. Except the camera is always zoomed in and switching around so frantically that you can't even tell what is going on half the time.
Now I bet you're asking, but Brad! (Because my name is Brad) This is Blade we are talking about, there must be something good here. Well, there are a few silver linings in this movie. Snipes is excellent as always, Jessica Beil has never looked hotter, Dominic Purcell does an okay job as Dracula, some of King's (Reynolds) jokes can be humorous, the vampire Pomeranian was funny, Dracula (in his true form) looked awesome, and the sword fight between Blade and Drake was cool. But it's all weighed down by bad writing, bad acting, illogical turns, and bad directing.
I can only recommend this as a rent at best. But please don't expect to be blown away, the first two are suited for that. I give Blade: Trinity, TWO lowly sidekicks of Blade's out of FIVE.
Battlestar Galactica (2003)
The dawn of a new era. A sci-fi show you don't have to be a nerd to watch.
Before this re-imagining was even announced I had never before heard about "Battlestar Galactica" except when an overweight comic book geek mentioned it on TV. But when I heard such a show was airing I found myself....well, gitty. Never watching the old series I spent the night that it first aired glued to my TV waiting for it to come on. And after I watched the whole miniseries, I was blown away. A sci-fi show with no lasers? No elaborate, all too clean, spacecrafts? No weird talking animals? A sci-fi show that is actually relevant to today? Can such a show exist? Yes, my friend.
Never before has such a show like this been created, "Naturalistic Science Fiction," is what the producers call it. It was created to shake things up in the sci-fi genre the only problem is that it came too late. Sci-fi is now associated to too extremes, Star Trek and Star Wars, both are great, I prefer Star Wars, but, whatever. And there have been smaller shows in between the two, Farscape, Stargate, the old BSG. But never before has this entered.
The new Battlestar Galactica is simply saying "screw those guys, I am the evolved one." And it shows, it shows. The story of the miniseries starts where the original series starts, the original series started with a movie by the way.
One of the most noticeable differences is the camera, what i mean is that you are aware that there is in fact a camera recording the action, from shaking to zooming in and out this is to give the impression that this is all really happening and that you are viewing war footage. Another thing is that everything feels authentic, from the towns to the corridors of the ships, everything is alive and is used in the scene, you actually feel that theses ships are real. Speaking of ships the new look of the Cylon ships is eerie to say the least.
The characters are also unique, for the first time you can have a tough WOMEN soldier without her being regarded as a lesbian. All the characters change, meaning they don't simply stay, the tough one, the scared one, the dumb one, they all switch to different roles.
The technology of the show is similar to that of our own and of Blade Runner. They also make do with what they have, there isn't a piece of technology that is presented to the characters at the beginning that will vanquish the enemy that will be introduced in ten minutes.
All in all if you are looking for something different to watch than the new Battlestar Galactica is one to see. In fact everyone should at least give it a try. Do not listen to those who say that it is bad they are the ones who would rather see the women as background characters, and who want the kid to be smarter than everyone else.
Give the miniseries a try.
I give it 9 "Screw you were more evolved" statements out of 10
Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest (2006)
Best movie of the summer.
WARNING (The following info has nothing to do with the movie please skip to the next section if you wish.)
With everyone getting all worked up about "Superman:Returns", or "X-men: 3", this was the summer movie that I personally have been waiting anxiously for. Now lets begin at the beginning, When I saw the 1st Pirates movie trailer I was a little confused as well as most other people. "Is Disney going to be making movie versions of all there rides?" was a question that popped in my head first, but the burning question was, "Is it gonna be good?" Well, we all know the answer to that. So I won't dwell on it. So naturally there had to have been a sequel, and too my amazement there will be at least two more sequels. Dead Man's Chest, and At the Worlds End. So naturally there were rumors and excitement all around the web.
Now I work at Disneyland and I have seen them prepare for the world premiere. (They had to kick out almost all the workers out of the area before it began *tear) With all this buzz I figured it had to have been good. And so I went to see it.
The actual movie review
It's true, almost all movie sequels are horrible, and the ones that are good aren't better than the first one. Only a few sequels surpass the original, i won't say that DMC is better than the first because that would make most fans angry. But I will say that Dead Man's Chest is truly a great, wonderful, and entertaining movie. My blood was pumping like crazy during the fight scenes, of Will, Jack, Norrington, Davey Jones' crew, and Liz.
The story> The story of the movie has several plot lines, other than the one plot line in the first. You have Jack's debt to Davey Jones, you have Will and Elizabeth's romancing life, and you have the East Indian Trading Company (which by the way gives the movie a slight historical significance)Throughout the movie these plots are kept separate, and intertwined towards the end. I personally love it when a movie has more things happening at once than a single straight storyline. Some people may disagree with me but, whatever.
The characters> All of the original cast return in this installment, including (SPOILER ALERT) Barbossa! Seriouslly if there was no internet or rumors would you guys actually expect to see him? Maybe... whatever. Anyway, all of the characters are back (and we are also introduced to none other then "Boot-strap" Bill Turner)and it makes me happy to see what has become of them since the first movie. Will and Elizabeth are arrested at the beginning for helping jack, and Norrington is now a drunken dirty mess because he lost everything. Johnny Depp's character is still the same funny, and eccentric pirate we all know and love, some people say that there has been a negative difference in his character but I haven't really noticed anything.
The action> To the movie's credit the action is truly fierce, and exhilarating. However there wasn't really any ship to ship battles, there was a very brief one between the Black Pearl and the Flying Dutchman, but it was short lived. There is a very long battle between pretty much all the major characters which did seem to be a bit too long for a single battle. The fight between Jack, Will, and Norrington pretty much lasted throughout the entire island which is a bit unrealistic, but then a again Disney did make this. Even though Elizabeth said that Will has been teaching her how to fight she seemed a bit TOO advanced then her character should be, stabbing at people with her back turned, dual wielding swords, with her eyes closed. But other than that there wasn't a whole lot more action in the movie. But it was till fun to watch.
The CGI> The CGi was truly an incredible feat to do, making things look as realistic as possible however there were parts where it seemed that they ran out some money, The Krakken needed a bit more polishing at some parts, and there were also parts where it seemed that they had no choice but to do minor CGI because if it looked to real it could have turned this PG-13 to an R.
Which brings me to my last part, a warning really, there are parts in this movie that I believe to be WAY too graphic for the younger audience members, such as brains being exposed, eyes getting pecked out body parts, etc.
This is a movie that is certainly not bad, it is great, fun, humorous, and exciting. I recommend this to anyone who loves Johnny Depp, or Pirates, or just wants to have a good time. I give "Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest." an 8 out of 10