Reviews

Well, despite how "average" the first one was, I went to see the second. And oh boy I am glad I did (you can already tell this is a positive review). More to the point, the film is one of, if not the strongest individual Marvel installments to date. One part spy thriller, one part character journey, one part action movie, and one part straight-up superhero adventure film, The Winter Soldier hits all of the right notes and serves as an example of the very best of what comic book movies have to offer. I was extremely surprised at how much I enjoyed the film in the first place. The beginning of the movie is a sort of message from the directors, "Welcome Back to the Marvel Universe". In The Avengers, Captain America acted like just a normal soldier who can jump high and punch hard but in The Winter Soldier, his powers really do shine. His superhuman strength and agility is shown perfectly, like the comics, and this is one of the main improvements from the first film and The Avengers. Captain America: The Winter Soldier benefits from a great story, solid actors, realistic CGI, action and also a mysterious, haunting villain, The Winter Soldier. Character isn't sacrificed for the sake of plot, though. The Winter Soldier is a well-balanced film that involves comedy, drama, and action. The big and small moments are equally thick with tension and there is some powerful development in this film. In fact, Chris Evans' Steve Rogers / Captain America in some ways becomes the most relatable of the Marvel heroes in this film, which is, of course, a bit odd, given his origin.

Story: Post-Avengers, Rogers is a useful asset for superspy organisation S.H.I.E.L.D., but also a pain in the backside. During a great opening set-piece in which Rogers, Natasha Romanoff (Scarlett Johansson) and a squad of S.H.I.E.L.D. goons take out a crew of pirates, our hero complains of being forced to play "Fury's caretaker". This is not what he signed up for. This is not what America should be doing. History has seen the nation gradually diminished from world's saviour, to world's policeman, to a "caretaker" over the course of decades. For Rogers the moral decline appears instant, and it rankles intensely. Then, the viewers are warned, that there is a mole inside S.H.I.E.L.D and Cap needs to find who it is and from then on...disaster strikes. The Winter Soldier makes his appearance and Cap has his most challenging enemy. The story has an old-school thriller vibe and is certainly Marvel's most mature film even though there are pretty much no explicit scenes. It's a sort of action epic conspiracy thriller mystery all in one. And the filmmakers, Anthony and Joe Russo, nail it all. The Winter Soldier doesn't fall in the cliché pit like it's Iron Man brothers and therefore makes it one of Marvel's most enjoyable movies. 8/10

Action and Acting: The Winter Soldier's action is one of the most surprisingly visceral of all and The Russo Brothers definitely show how powerful Cap is. From punching baddies to throwing his SHIELD (haha) against packs of goons, knocking the living daylights out of them. It's brutal and is actually really cool to watch. Agent Romanoff's agility is unmatchable and The Winter Soldier's power is underestimated. There is much more to admire and The Winter Soldier has plenty of epic action scenes hidden up it's sleeve. The Acting in The Winter Soldier is also great as you expect from a Marvel film so there is nothing to judge about. 9/10

The ending may be a bit negatively unorthodox but the film Marvel is made is one of the best they have ever made. A perfectly enjoyable thriller epic that hits all the right boxes. Go and see it. I rate it 8.7 out of 10.

The film is particularly hard to judge, mainly because it has fantastic moments and some weak moments. Since the entire story of Noah is only told in three chapters in Genesis, it will always be a hard film to make and Darren Aronofsky should certainly be applauded for his brave effort. Directors like Steven Spielberg or Christopher Nolan, I imagine, will say that it would be a hard film to make despite how good they are. Director Darren Aronofsky has made some artistic and powerful films like The Fountain and Requiem For A Dream. He made Black Swan, which was a particular critical favourite. The audience however didn't get the entire film I have heard. He is a fantastic director but I don't think he really suited the project itself but from what he has done, he has done a confident effort in delivering the story of Noah. The combination of Darren Aronofsky and the story of Noah is certainly an evocative one. Aronofsky's films often feel like vivid fever dreams, and it's an intriguing choice for him to tackle this huge biblical tale. Noah, played by the legendary Russell Crowe, is an interesting interpretation. He is good however. Very good in fact but one of the main flaws of the film is about Noah's character: He is depicted as a negative character.

Story: The opening (including some text on screen that, essentially, gives you a cliffs notes of the Bible, up to the Noah tale, over some cool Aronofsky visuals) establishes that God, here continually called "The Creator", is certainly believed in by most everyone, but also has gone so long without making his presence felt that it's assumed he long ago abandoned or moved on from the people he put on the Earth. In my personal opinion, I didn't like the opening. It's ambitious and audacious, yes, but it is hard to watch and hard to take in the amount of information given to you. It's rushed and since it's rushed, it sadly opens a massive hole in the boat of characterisation. This is one of the film's flaws but as the film's story progresses, it is easily forgivable. Noah who begins to have visions sent to him by the Creator, warning that thanks to humanity's misdeeds, the end is coming, in the form of a great flood. Noah then devises a plan, to build an ark to save the innocent (the animals of the world) and his family. If I continue to offer more exposition, it will spoil the film's story! As a warning for those who will be surprised, expect added material to the story. I find this perfectly necessary to add more elements to the story because, if you do realise, Noah is three chapters long in the Bible. You have to add stuff to make the film entertaining. The added material by Aronofsky is, yes, unexpected, but I thought it was cleverly executed and very necessary. I won't go into too much detail. But as the story progresses, Noah is depicted as a negative character through his intentions and this isn't correct. In the Bible's teachings, Noah was very obedient and respectful. This is shown in the film, yes, but the audience doesn't clearly understand. Noah does things in the film to be obedient and I think the audience won't realise what he is actually doing. This does cause confusion and you need to watch the film to understand. Epic battles take place in the film and this is part of the added material, but it is well done and I think it suits perfectly with the story.

Action, FX and Acting: Noah's epic scenes really are epic and Aronofsky's visual intepretation is brilliant. The film involves the telling of how the world was created and beautifully and noticeably blends evolution and the creation of the world without telling false doctrine of the Bible. This involves amazing imagery and artistic visuals to tell the story and is very well executed by the filmmakers. The action is brief but effective. Ray Winstone's villain, Cain, is generic, as you expect, but interesting and sinister. The battle's between Noah's allies and Cain's army are admiring, intense and perfectly assembled and this is one of the positive things about the movie. Noah is inventive, ambitious, brutal and beautiful: a potent mythological epic. But also wilfully challenging, as likely to infuriate as inspire, whether through its unmitigated Old Testament harshness or its eco-message revisionism and the action is part of that. The acting is very, very, very good particularly by rising star Emma Watson as Noah's adopted "daughter", not really, and Noah's wife played by Jennifer Connolly. In fact, they are Golden Globe worthy but not quite Oscar worthy. Powerful and affecting performances.

Darren Aronofsky and Russell Crowe bring an offbeat, visually exciting version of the story of Noah to the big screen. The lack of characterisation is disappointing and the opening of the film is far fetched and hard to watch. Yes, this does let the film fall but not much. It's religious aspects confuse but this is because Noah is told in a certain way. A polarising way. It's a love or hate film but I did like it. It's phenomenally bold and ambitious, and ends up being, in my opinion, one of the hardest film to make that rightfully succeeds. People may not like it for it's creative, weird method of storytelling but they will like it for its bold effort. A preposterous but endearingly unhinged epic with soul and heart. This is a Noah for the 21st century, one of the most dazzling and unforgettable biblical epics ever put on film.

Just go and see it. See for yourself.

Verdict = 7.1 out of 10

The Amazing Spider-Man was a hard buy. It's aesthetics didn't match Sam Raimi's trilogy, despite how bombastic the third one was, but Andrew Garfield was a better Spider-Man, not a better Peter Parker. It was a favourable average film that had a lot of room for improvement but since they announced the second film, I was instantly excited. I was expecting the sequel to have major improvements over the first and my expectations were correct. The Amazing Spider-Man 2 has lots of improvements to admire. Director Marc Webb's sequel is bold and bright and possesses charm in abundance. It swings into the future and carries the audience with it. Entertainment is important and this film has it. One thing in the film is noticeable, however, it suffers from a clumsy script.

Events begin not long after the end of the first film. Peter Parker is still haunted by the death of Gwen's father and the promise he failed to keep (to protect his daughter by leaving her alone). But in some ways he's moved on, graduating high school, enjoying life and really embracing the role of being New York's protector. Unlike so many superheroes, the identity of Spider-Man doesn't seem to be a burden but a release for Peter – he's confident and cocky with his now-honed abilities. Director Marc Webb presents this brilliantly. The audience are instantly hooked into Peter's life and his responsibilities and this is because of engaging screenplay and playful cinematography, expertly executed. The beginning of the film shows Spider-Man battling on-the-run criminals as part of his responsibility and this gets in the way of Peter and Gwen's relationship. During this chase, Peter saves a man from a car crash named Max Dillon (played by Jamie Foxx) who works for Oscorp, led by Harry Osborn, Peter's childhood friend. The film tries to introduce Max Dillon as a character for whom we should feel sympathy – he's socially awkward, lonely, unappreciated, and since Spider-Man saved his life, he's become obsessed with the hero. Max, shortly after a major accident at Oscorp, discovers that he has powerful electric powers and soon becomes Electro, the main antagonist of the film. This is well told through the detailed, enjoyable but increasingly clumsy script. One thing that confuses me about the film is that the first instalment was supposed to be "the untold story of Peter Parker". This film actually shares more untold elements than the first, such as finding out what happened to Peter's parents. Peter's parents are a big part of The Amazing Spider-Man 2's plot, without going into much detail. The Amazing Spider-Man 2 benefits from a lot of good qualities, such as a brilliant chemistry between Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone, a great Spider-Man, satisfying and exhilarating action and well presented villains but also negatively benefits from minor issues. It's childish but emotional script penned by Alex Kurtsman & Roberto Orci lets the film down and frankly, it may be a biased opinion, their work on Transformers was TERRIBLE. There's a lot going on in Amazing Spider-Man 2, and sadly it doesn't always come together because of it's writers.

Action, as you expect from a Marvel film, is very good indeed. Spider-Man's abilities are shown perfectly without any flaw in the picture. Music is quite unique and heroic, brought together by Hans Zimmer, The Magnificent Six, Pharrell Williams & Johnny Marr. It certainly sounds good, with high-quality instruments and themes but some material sounds like it came from another movie. The acting is very good as well. Andrew Garfield is a FANTASTIC Spider-Man and is certainly better at his role than the previous instalment. The film positively benefits from a great cast in overall and there is nothing to judge, especially Dane DeHann as he steals the show as Harry Osborn / Green Goblin.

Pros & Cons:

+ Great chemistry with Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone and director Marc Webb.

+ Very entertaining presentation and opening. Perfectly judged slingshot ending.

+ Great Spider-Man action and great villains.

+ Improves the strengths of the first film entirely such as action and presentation.

+ Unique and powerful soundtrack by Hans Zimmer, The Magnificent Six, Pharrell Williams and Johnny Marr.

• Disappointing script and muddled story dominates the film's positive reception.

• Not enough action from a Spider-Man film like the first.

Verdict: 7.7 out of 10

Since the awful disappointment of the 90's remake of Godzilla, the arrival of a new and more refined version stimulated a great deal of anticipation in me! The new trailer was expertly made, I was very, very excited. After months of speculation from my family, I finally got the chance to see it. What a clichéd, delightful surprise. In all honesty, Godzilla lived up to its expectations. Making a B-movie into a more realistic film is a hard job but director Gareth Edwards delivers a satisfying disaster movie that only some audiences, including myself, will fully appreciate. It's superior, reputable and full-out epic but it's greatness also turns into it's weakness. Clichés. Almost every film in the modern world accept clichés into it's script and this is one of them. Godzilla rightfully tries to avoid the garbage clichés but fails to contain them through it's love story between Aaron Taylor-Johnson's Ford and Elizabeth Olson's Elle. Their performances are respectable, they are fine but Bryan Cranston, who is famous for brilliantly portraying Walter White in television series Breaking Bad, steals the show as Joe Brody, the father figure who is shown obsessed with how mysterious signs of Godzilla's presence have appeared. Joe tries to study the signs along with the Japanese guy in Inception, and the story unfolds. In the story, astonishing surprises unfold and sadly I cannot continue to explain the story with spoiling it! To put it in words, it is unexpected and actually quite clever. Through it's surprises, Godzilla's power is unleashed and the film turns into an action- fest, without showing all the destruction it actually can. It avoids it, but the ending has plenty of it. Having said, I admired its ending because really the film is a guilty pleasure, like Pacific Rim. It was made for people's entertainment and it is easily recognisable in Edwards' direction. The devastating lizard / dinosaur / crocodile / dragon has plenty of astonishing action. Godzilla kicking butt is definitely a guilty pleasure to watch. I would, however, liked to have seen it in IMAX 3D. It think the experience would be even more admirable. This is because the visuals in Godzilla are incredible, Godzilla is a breathtaking beast! At times, you actually root for Godzilla to wreak havoc, you'll understand when you watch the film. The suspense is also really well executed.

Pros and Cons:

+ Fantastic Godzilla action + Unexpected, cleverly executed story elements + Bryan Cranston's bombshell performance + Great visuals + Brilliant suspense - An acquired taste for some audiences - Expected clichés - Human characterisation doesn't fully pay off

In all, Godzilla is both questionable and astonishing. For the full experience, go and see it in IMAX.

Verdict = 8 out of 10.

Naughty Dog has done it again.

The studio behind the classic Crash Bandicoot and the excellent Uncharted series has decided to take a different approach and make a game about what it takes to survive in the zombie apocalypse.

The game is very visceral and thought-provoking as the character development is outstanding. You care for the characters, especially protagonist Joel who has had a harder life than most. The Last of Us' presentation is immersive and surprisingly realistic.

The gameplay to The Last of Us is not your typical survival horror. It is brutal, smart and creative and can prove to be quite fun. The stealth mechanics have improved throughly from the Uncharted games and the ability to make weapons, upgrade them and craft items is clever and survival horror-like.

The story is very good and very striking to draw into. The Last of Us has adopted Uncharted's excellent graphics and is very pretty and detailed. The Last of Us is easily one of the best looking games out there.

The soundtrack to The Last of Us is quite unique and suits the game very well. It reminded me of Red Dead Redemption. Gustavo Santaollala is a very talented composer and his score for The Last of Us is brilliant.

One thing that annoyed me about this game was it's use of strong language. It is extremely frequent and I was hoping for a option to turn off the language. EVERY GAME SHOULD HAVE THAT.

The Last of Us is an achievement and is one of the best I have played. Naughty Dog prove how to make a visceral gaming experience and the game is a masterpiece.

Possibly the best PS3 exclusive ever. An amazing game worth more than calling it a "masterpiece"

A must-have game.

Notice: This review is not biased. I have completed all Mass Effect games and I absolutely love them. This is my honest opinion.

I stumbled upon Dragon Age: Origins a while ago and I thought it looked really cool so i decided to buy a copy for my Xbox. Since it was made by BioWare, who made the amazing Mass Effect games and KOTOR, I thought it was going to be another great game to play. It's promotional presentation, however, deceived me.

I made my character, a Mage and I have to say really like the customization in the game. The amount of content is staggering. I started the missions and I thought it was great.

Until I began.

As soon as I was shown the game's storyline, I thought it was uninteresting. This is surprising to me because BioWare are a great company who made some fantastic games that ended up being RPG classics. I wasn't drawn to the story and it kind of bored me. I decided to stop playing as a mage and began as a warrior. That was bad too so I decided to play as a dwarf and...it was worse.

The character voices are surprisingly weak and the characters themselves were completely forgettable. Dragon Age: Origins disappointed me. BioWare disappointed me.

Although, I did like the gameplay mechanics and its skill system despite it's repetitive aspects. The magic and warrior spells are cool to watch and to wield.

Dragon Age: Origins is the most overrated RPG I have played and that is my honest opinion. I do not know why people love it so much?

Surprisingly disappointing, uninteresting and it's fun gameplay can't save it.

Do a better job, BioWare.

Beyond: Two Souls is a game like no other. It's simply outstanding in terms of it's individuality and story. It has real actors such as Ellen Page and Willem Dafoe, who prove to be truly great at delivering their roles. The highlight of this game is Page, as Jodie Holmes. You fell connected to the character and you care about her as you struggle to fight contention and danger throughout the game. Quantic Dream know how to make a game with realistic characters and a powerful storyline, I'll tell you that.

Be warned. The gameplay is unique and sometimes enjoyable but don't expect Beyond: Two Souls to raise the bar in the gameplay categories, as it is meant to be played as an interactive tale or movie. The gameplay is very much an acquired taste but most people will enjoy it.

The music to this game is simply one of the best soundtracks in the history of entertainment. An emotional and beautiful, artistic, melodramatic soundtrack composed by Normand Corbeil, Lorne Balfe with help from music mastermind Hans Zimmer. It is so good, the soundtrack. The themes are very strong and quite amazing. This game is better than what most people think.

Beyond: Two Souls might suffer from some critics but trust me, DO NOT listen to them. It really is a unique game that captures your attention.

An essential play.

I got the game. I loved the game. Completed it in 14 hours and I used to have COD. Now I love it.

Treyarch have done something astonishing. There is an unbelievable amount of things in this game from Customization to Zombies.

Get the game. It's a great one.

Like COD 4 Modern Warfare. It's still a COD game in many ways, but some very welcome changes in the Multiplayer, Zombies and even the Campaign (a rare pleasure) make this a more enjoyable experience than past games.

Guys. It is great.

9/10

Beautiful violence. That is what Crysis really is.

It's the first Crysis game I've tried on a console instead of PC and I must say it looks beautiful.

Crysis was never just about graphics for me, but gameplay and story. Gameplay doesn't exactly change from Crysis 2, with few additions like the predator bow but the storyline is this iteration's strong point now it's more personal, quoting the game, "it's never been just about the suit", with a great memorable ending.

Level design is also a major improvement, with 7 beautiful and non-linear levels, which are larger than in Crysis 2, but (of course) smaller than in the original. As for multiplayer, it is quite engaging, and the Hunter mode is brilliant.

One big letdown is the game's length even with all the side missions and some datapad hunting, the slow and steady stealth playthrough took me only 7 hours 20 minutes. By the way, the datapads contain some very interesting background information with some plot base for possible future games.

To sum up, the overall impression is that the game is more of a standalone expansion like Warhead was to original Crysis, and not the actual third part of the trilogy, with its shortness and few gameplay changes. However, it's a damn good game, improving on Crysis 2 in everything but the game's length, and it's a damn good game overall. They called him Prophet. And I will remember him.

Crysis 3 is really a beautiful game. The visuals are just stunning. The textures have been improved to the max and the lighting is memorable. The AI is easy only on casual but Veteran is a perfect difficulty. Super Soldier and Post Human Warrior are INSANE. I do not know why some critics are saying that the AI is bad? That is just ridiculous.

Crysis 3 is a fantastic game. It really is.

For the best experience, get the PC version (if you have the right computer that is) but the console version is still good.

9/10

VHS 2 is a sequel to my favourite horror film, VHS. It is a compilation of terrifying short films which, first of all, are very well made and are all insanely scary.

Entertaining, intense. These are only some of the words that describe VHS 2. The directors (Brad Wingard etc.) do a fabulous job at the helm and they deliver a horrifying feel to the genre and do a successful job at making myself and others uncomfortable and scared!

Great found-footage film, impressive amateur acting and a daring view at what horror films should be. k For a great horror night out with either you or with your pals, VHS 2 will make you horrified.

See it!

In my opinion, the biggest Oscar snub ever.

Plus, one of the most underrated films of all time.

The film is simply and visually beautiful and it delivers an important and breathtaking message. Tykwer and both Wachowskis do a groundbreaking job at making a great film to watch.

Best thing about the film: the music composed by Tom Tykwer (one of the directors), Reinhold Heil and Johnny Klimek. The most beautiful soundtrack ever brought to my ears.

The film contains six stories that all link with each other and they are heartbreaking, epic, wonderful and even hilarious!

The only thing that slightly disappointed me about the film was SOME of the makeup. Halle Berry's transformation into a white, German woman was very, very impressive but some of Hugo Weaving's make up was kind of unprofessional.

Great film, great score, great action, moderately great makeup, impressive set decoration and a great script.

In words: Daring, impressive and insanely epic.

Wonderful film.

Les Miserables is a one of a kind.

Best thing about the film (apart from the music) is the Acting. It's absolutely brilliant with a fantastic performance by Hugh Jackman and Anne Hathaway. Singing was spot on.

The film though feels a bit rushed. When the emotional scenes kick in, you don't really feel the emotion (unless you are a bit lighthearted). The action is also fairly average. I just think that another director who suits this genre would of done a better job. The film was also INSANELY hyped. It is a great film but it is far from being a classic.

Apart from the things said above, it is a great film with outstanding acting and beautiful music.

See it.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is very impressive in terms of storytelling, action, VFX, cinematography and many more. It's a great film.

The first time I watched The Lord of the Rings Trilogy (about 6 years ago), I decided it was the best movie I had ever seen. It was a pure masterpiece and it was a film you can watch over and over again without getting bored or sick of it. The Hobbit was not as good as the original LOTR but it sure is a damn good film.

The Hobbit takes place before the events of LOTR and tells the story of Frodo's guardian, Bilbo Baggins. He meets Gandalf, the ultimate badass wizard, who asks him to go on an adventure with a group of hilarious but brave dwarfs to take back the dwarfs' homeland. Bilbo is introduced very effectively and you feel straight back in Middle Earth. It really is great.

The acting in The Hobbit is fantastic and the highlight of the film is definitely the dwarfs. Absolutely hilarious.

One thing that let me down about The Hobbit was that it felt rushed. For me, it seemed that Peter Jackson had little time because most of the orcs were CG. It let me down because there wasn't a lot of weapons made by Weta Workshop and Peter disappointed me. That was why I rated it an 8.

Everything else in the film was spot on. The set decoration was brilliant and the company did a great job at making this a magical world of brilliance. The cinematography was impressive, smooth and satisfying. Music was again a great score composed by mastermind Howard Shore, who also did the music for LOTR. The script was very well adapted by Peter and co.

So yeah. A great and worthy return to Middle-Earth that completely satisfies you.

Brilliant film. 8/10

The Hurt Locker is good, very good but is seriously hyped up by many people.

First of all, acting is great and the script is enjoyable but in terms of story it is overall, poor.

It basically is all about a group of soldiers who simultaneously disarm extremely dangerous bombs in Iraq.

One fantastic thing about this movie is that it is very realistic and extremely intense but then when some scenes are intense, the scenes end up as a very disappointing climax apart from one very sad but intense scene in the film.

Kathryn Bigelow has directed this film very well but her job handling the story is very, very mediocre.

The Hurt locker is good but disappointing.

6.8/10