Change Your Image
stak441
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
The Hunger Games (2012)
Could have been great...
The good: This looked promising from the beginning, the setting, the idea behind the game, the main character. I was expecting another action-centered movie based around a sadistic game show that, for some, reason manages to be highly accepted and liked by the society, without raising the question "Wait, isn't that wrong"? The film makers, however, took their time to rationalize such behavior and to explain why the game participants actually try to get the audience to like them.
The characters are quite believable and some of them have sufficient character development. Still, I think the character of Woody Harrelson is highly underdeveloped and he appeared to be the most interesting and promising one. I really think the director should have put more screen time and emphasis on him.
Now for the bad: The initial pace was OK, but the culmination came and ended to quickly. In the end I was like "Duh, was that it?". At some point in the movie there was a hint that the plot will continue also outside of the Games (the riot at district 11). This, however, was just a teaser. The action in the whole movie was very limited, but that might be a good thing because the shaky camera made those scenes unbearable to watch.
Overall, the Hunger Games had a lot of potential but it was never fully realized. But this is to be expected from book adaptations, isn't it? 6 out of 10
Mission London (2010)
A fair attempt at modern cinema
As a short introduction, I would like to mention that this is the first time I write a review on this board. I felt obliged to do it for 2 reasons: 1. I'm Bulgarian and I've waited a long time to see a quality Bulgarian movie; 2. Most Bulgarians giving the reviews give a biased judgment, including (but not limited to) the clichés "OMFG, this was the best movie evAr!" ,"Better than Hollywood crap", "Perfect", etc.. But since I'm a fan of (global) cinema I gave it my best to write an objective review.
After watching the movie for around 30 minutes, you will start getting the feeling that this is another Guy Ritchie production. And this is actually the movie's strongest and weakest point. Strong - because you have good directing, quality camera work, interesting characters and a few interweaving subplots. And bad - because the settings and scenery are dull (you almost have no idea that this is actually taking place in London), the comedy element is almost missing (despite the movie being announced as comedy) and some of the subplots are really...lets say strange (e.g. the ducks subplot). The latter was for me the biggest flaw. In comparison, movies like "Snatch" have numerous subplots and characters that constantly cross each other's path and even though some of them are really absurd you never get the feeling that they are out of place. In Mission London, however, the best effect that some of the subplots achieve is to confuse you.
But even with all the negatives, I think this movie did excellent job of showing that Bulgarian studios are capable of producing quality product. This was a great first attempt and I'm looking forward to the next ones. 7 out of 10