Change Your Image
joelcosta-jcx
Reviews
A Series of Unfortunate Events (2017)
Quirky, clever, comic. A fantastic show for people with a peculiar taste.
I figuratively don't know how to judge this inordinate, whimsical and mysterious series of unfortunate events. Or is it literally? Maybe I should ask Lemony Snicket.
The clever word plays and subtle humour, the remarkably bizarre and bizarrely remarkable dialogues and soliloquies, the notable and droll characters, the ludicrous plot. All of them make this TV show unique, and unprecedented in style.
Don't let yourself fool of the first minutes of the first episode, it does seem strange, with odd CGI effects, and a "talking", rock-chewing baby. The episodes come in pairs of two, and so I think you should watch the two first episodes as a whole to get a good impression and to decide whether you continue it or not.
The tone is not as dark as I expected, it's very light actually, and yet it's able to convey a certain dreadfulness. I do hope that they add a more sinister accent to it in the second season.
The plot itself isn't surprising, or shocking, mainly because Lemony Snicket likes to spoil when a horrible event is on it's way. ("You mean 'its', as in belonging to it". I said 'its'.) But after a while you will see that this is part of the charm of this series.
The show's humour goes through running gags, word plays, deliberate anachronisms, droll characters, witty references to our modern culture (which I would file under anachronisms, but I think they should be pointed out for themselves), and the occasional fourth-wall-breaking.
Neil Harris' performance as Count Olaf is impressive. The odd thing about it: it's exceptionally reminiscent of his role as Barney Stinson in How I Met Your Mother. And it fits. I would even say that it goes hand in hand with the anachronisms and fourth-wall humour.
If you're looking for a show with a dramatic and thrilling plot à la Game of Thrones, or Breaking Bad, this isn't the show you're looking for.
If you enjoyed the clever humour of a show like Arrested Development, you're more susceptible to enjoy this show.
I'd give it a 8.5/10. I'd rather round it up that down, so I decided to give it a 9/10.
Prison Break: The Final Break (2009)
Ridiculous and unrealistic plot, plot holes without end, and unnecessary.
The whole premise is ridiculous. Sara shouldn't be in jail for countless reasons: exoneration, self-defense (affirmative defense is not to be proved beyond reasonable doubt, but only by preponderance of evidence), the fact that the mother is officially dead, which would induce a lengthy process, so Sara would have never been sent to prison after being detained, there'd be steps to follow, giving them enough time to once again prove her innocence.
After his record, the General should have landed in a more secure facility like Supermax. There's no way he could pull the strings from such a facility.
The family subplot in the women's jail added nothing important to the plot. It was a cheap T-Bag ripoff, and nothing more.
The way they escaped prison was trivial, nothing compared to the schemes of the third season, let alone the first one. Character development was, like in season 4, not present.
It's ridiculous that Michael has a plan to virtually any situation, but can't come up with something better that using his own body to save the day.
The ending was ridiculous. They're free? No, you're not, morons. After your stunt, you're at the same spot as in the beginning of season 2. Except you don't have the $5M, and Mike is dead, unless he magically resurrects like several other characters from the show.
This renders the previous "final episode" totally useless and unrealistic. How are they all able to live that way, if they're constantly on the run? How are they able to visit Michael's tombstone, that'd be exactly where they'd be looked for.
I gave the entire show a 7/10, which is a good rating on my scale. The first two seasons were an easy 9/10, the third season was fine, but the 4th destroyed it. However, the end was good enough. They were free at last, it's what we've waited for, and Mike's dead, but it gives us the impression that he died in peace, maybe even having met his son before. But this extra ending screwed everything up.
Besides many plot holes, no character development, bad repeated story, the acting wasn't extreme too. There was no chemistry during all four seasons between Mike and Sara, and I understand that they were on the run, but at their last moment, that was nothing, just cold, and emotionless. That's not convincing. Morgan was like in the previous seasons badly acted. Alex was okay. Linc and Sucre weren't special.
Horrible ending, let's just pretend it didn't exist. It's feels like the last nail on the coffin that the 4th season was for the show. A friend recommended me Prison Break as it got better during the last season and the ending was in his words "unprecedented". That's a big claim for someone who hasn't watched many show, if any at all. Most people who rated this ending with 7-10/10: don't trust them. They probably haven't seen what a good ending looks like, and haven't watched many quality TV shows, so in their eyes it's great. It's like an Ethiopian child eating the worst food you could find: he'll love it, because he doesn't know the good stuff. Sorry for the macabre comparison, but it's the only way to make people realise how shitty this ending was, and the only way to explain those 7-10/10 ratings.
Assassin's Creed (2016)
Not what I wanted but way better than critics say
I went to see the movie with low expectations: video game adaption, bad reviews, and I know too much of the franchise.
Turns out I do know the games too well to not notice where it all went wrong. But the reviews don't reflect the movie's quality at all. Most are full of pretentiousness and bias against video game adaptions. Don't get me wrong, there are many fair critiques too, some that I'll address myself, but they are a minority. When you read that the story was too rushed and too slow, you know there's something wrong with them. Confusing end? Only if you have the short attention span of a gold fish.
Now my actual review:
***Spoilers start***
The opening scene was well done, but not well chosen. Whatever happens in Aguilar's story, should happen inside the Animus. That gives us the feeling that we're living the story with Callum. This seems like a minor thing, but it's important to the whole Animus-story.
The music was average. Some parts of it were oddly similar to Interstellar. The only really horrible part was right after the Aguilar intro, it didn't suit at all.
The present story was well-paced, and well done for a first movie where they have to set up the groundwork, but not special. The side characters weren't given enough depth, the only good characters were Callum and Sofia, with a nice ending to their development. It wasn't great, but good.
The past story was thin. They hardly had any Animus time, and when they did, it was mostly action scenes. It was good not to give it too much time for the first movie, but a bit more would've helped. In the games, Altair's story wasn't long either, but it was good, it gave us an idea of what assassins are and their origin.
The worst: the Animus. A central point to the story, changing it so drastically shows a lack of faith in the source material. That arm was needless at best. The altar or chair would have be fine. It consumed too much time of the movie, looked very bad (CGI-wise), was cheesy, and I bet it cost a lot more than making an actual prop of the altar/chair.
It was executed poorly, constantly switching to the present while in an action scene totally cut the immersion into the past story.
Then Sophie said that he can't control anything inside the Animus. That's just plain wrong and takes away any stakes. For whoever hasn't played the games: You DO control the person inside the Animus. And if you fail to replicate the memory, you get desynchronised. You can't travel to Rome in the Animus if the character hasn't been there until then, because there are no memories of Rome, you can't unlock them. You can die, and you get desynchronised. You can do stuff around the world freely, as long as it is withing the boundaries of the memories and you synchronise well. By completing a memory, you unlock the next one. Like when you're looking for your car keys, you remember some moment before, and replicate what you did from then on. Horribly implemented in the movie, the worst part of it, and such an important one.
The action scenes in the first half were constantly interrupted by the animation of the Animus, and the camera cuts were awful. But as the last Animus sequence began, they were much more fluent and interesting. While not perfect, and not up to the games' standards, they were nice.
The CGI was bad. The only CGI they truly needed outside the Animus was the Apple of Eden, which looked unspectacular. The rest could've been done with props, and it would've looked much better.
The costumes and weapons were nice, there's really not much to say here.
Atmosphere-wise, at some points I thought they took it too seriously, too "edgy". Usually AC has some more light humour, a certain charm and freshness. They tried it in the cafeteria scene, but it wasn't nearly as good as in the games. It also lacked that mystical, scary feeling with the glyphs, and the artefacts and everything.
"We work in the dark to serve the light". Then do it. Assassins kill silently, effectively, and with style, it should be dramatic, not too action-packed. Some action scenes are fine, but put the focus on the silent killing.
The way they explained the artefacts: cheesy. "It's the genetic code for free will." What? No, no it isn't, stop inventing. You literally have a manual for the apple in the games, use it! This sounds so pseudo-scientific, and sure it's sci-fi, but it sounds somehow believable. But genetic code for free will? Why would you say that?
***Spoilers end***
The movie as a whole wasn't great in the first half. The second half really saved it. The story became faster, the action scenes better, the characters more interesting. Luckily, otherwise this movie would have been a disaster, and albeit being far from perfect, it's still good. I recommend it, as, despite its immense flaws, it's still really enjoyable, and builds the groundwork to a great continuation.
All in all it really showed lack of faith in the source material. The one-dimensional representation of assassins as mere weapon wielders, the cringey explanation of the Apple of Eden, and the Animus. If they had trusted the source material, dug into it, used it correctly, then this movie could have easily been 8.5/10. It's not Assassin's Creed if it doesn't include the main properties of the game. Taking risks is fine, but there's a difference between that and changing fundamental points in the franchise. When are you going to get it, Hollywood? If they trusted more in the source material, that would be great.
Overall rating: 7.5/10
Shin Sekai Yori (2012)
Good, but not great. Missed chance to be a masterpiece. Worth watching though.
For those who haven't watched it yet, I put all the spoilers between spoiler tags, like this: *spoiler* Here is a spoiler: Dumbledore dies. */spoiler*.
My expectations were high after all the good ratings and recommendations. I was told by friends that it was a darker anime, and after watching the first few episodes, now knowing what kind of world the anime revolves around, I was zealous about it. But unfortunately I was disappointed.
The sound was marvellous, and I think that all those reviews point that out. It's because it isn't just good, nor great, nor awesome. It's wonderful. I'm not even going into detail, because it's ineffable.
Unlike most people in the reviews, I personally enjoyed the design and animation. It was simple, but appropriate. It made the darker moments look darker to me. Like the shaky camera in some moments in Breaking Bad. Little spoiler here: *spoiler* The flashback of the boy who became a karma demon and went on a killing spree in a city, which I guess was Tokyo, was beautiful to look at. And I'm talking about people exploding, blood splattering. It looked neat, and set the tone for me. I was caught.*/spoiler*
But then came the letdown: the plot itself. It was disappointing. The narrative, as well as some twists were really great, but what killed it for me was that they jumped forward in time exactly when it started to become interesting. What a hoax. The main problem is for me, that it seemed like three short story arcs, linked together by some details. In all seriousness, they should have omitted the queerats and focus on the group of five people struggling in this dystopian world, *spoiler* while Shun becomes a Fiend or Karma Demon. Maybe they would be exiled for prying to much into business that isn't theirs, or similar. */spoiler*
The character development may be what suffered most from this sudden jumps. I wasn't really attached to any of the characters, maybe a bit to Satoru, who for me was the most interesting character.
*spoiler* Another thing that bugged me was, for instance, how Maria and Mamoru died. They left the civilisation, and then at some point, twenty years later, we are told that they are actually dead, and that it wasn't pretence. Maybe that was emblematic of how the government in the town is run, that so many secrets are kept. But in the end, I felt hoaxed again.*/spoiler*
Separately, the three story arcs were good though, so it's not like the plot was bad. It was good, but I think that it's a shame that they didn't exploit the anime's full potential.
Tl;dr: Wonderful sound, great animation and design, three good story arcs, but poorly connected overall plot. Could easily have been a masterpiece. Wasn't one in my opinion. Still worth to watch. I rate it 8.5/10.