Star Trek | Review

Star Trek

IMDb Page

Trailer

 

Rank 225 as of 1/1/13)

Age Rating 12A

Year 2009

 

DISCLAIMER: this is NOT my review. cant be bothered to say why I'm not reviewing, you can probably guess anyway.

 

This is the 'most helpful' review from IMDb:

There was no way that this reboot was going to avoid all references to either the original series of Star Trek or the other spin-off series - anyone going in to see this film had to accept that as a given. But any cheesy bits (of which there were relatively few) are blown away by the sheer beauty and bravado of this film.

I was a fairly big Trekkie in my youth, but in the last 10 years only really kept up with it by watching a few new episodes here and there and seeing the big screen outings (OK, I admit that I have all 10 films on special edition DVD - £47 was a bargain!) - but Abrams' vision here has me thinking the new franchise will be even better than what has come before.

What made this film special for me was not the story (remarkably good, bearing in mind that, like the first film in any new franchise, it's backbone was character development). What made this film for me was the....photography? Can you even call CGI photography? Well, either way, this film was a visual feast. The way that scale was conveyed was breath-taking. I'm not sure whether I read this somewhere or if I can take credit for it myself, but the difference came in the way that Abrams shoved aside the traditional Star Trek view of Enterprise as a lumbering naval ship and took a more Star Wars-esquire dogfight approach. This has set a high standard for a new era of Star Trek that I hope will spawn at least a couple more films.

It's not that I wasn't impressed with the character development, the acting, the script or the story - it's just that this film looked so gorgeous that I haven't been able to think of anything else since I saw it last night! But sufficed to say, this was overall an excellent feature. It might not quite deserve a 100% rating, but it's worth more than 90% in my eyes - so, by rounding up, it gets 10/10 from me! Final warning: see this film in the cinema. Do not wait for it to come out on DVD. It. Will. Not. Do. It. Justice.

JJ, you've won a fan!

by leesidney (United Kingdom)

Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade | Review

Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade

IMDb Page

Trailer

 

Rank 97 as of 1/1/13)

Age Rating PG

Year 1989

 

DISCLAIMER: this is NOT my review. Reason for disliking Indiana Jones: boring and samey, which completely contradicts the review I'm about to post.

 

This is the 'most helpful' review from IMDb:
One thing you gotta say for this series: it isn't boring.
And "Last Crusade" has enough thrills, chills and spills to fill up a few dozen old Saturday afternoon serials.  Right down the line, everything about this film is superb. Ford and Connery do the father and son routine superbly. Rhys-Davies returns as Sallah, as does Elliott who plays Brody with as much befuddlement as Connery does his role. And who can blame him? And the FX: there's so many you lose count. But don't bother, just sit back, relax and get swept up in the moment. You can't help yourself but to get into this "Crusade".Ten stars. A classic Ford with a bright Sean.
 by Mister-6 (United States)

Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi | Review

Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi

IMDb Page

Trailer

 

 

Rank 81 as of 1/1/13)

Age Rating U

Year 1983

 

DISCLAIMER: this is NOT my review. Clearly this movie was a bit shit, ranked 81! But finally Star Wars is OVER! Read all the other bloody disclaimers.

 

 

This is the 'most helpful' review from IMDb:

Perspective is a good thing. Since the release of "Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace", claims and counter-claims of just how Episode's II and III will eventuate has taken the spotlight off the 'original' Star Wars films, making them part of a cohesive whole, rather than segregating the older and new films into separate trilogies. What the new films have done is allow fresh perspectives to be placed on the older films. This new outlook allows us to greater appreciate what has often been viewed as the weakest of the original trilogy: "Return of the Jedi". Often derided for its overly 'cute' factor, ROTJ is in a sense as strong as the original and only slightly less impressive than the nearly perfect "The Empire Strikes Back". Indeed the 'cute' element of ROTJ, namely the Ewoks, remains a weak link in the entire series. Did George Lucas place the furry midgets in the film purely for the merchandising possibilities? Only he can answer that question.

This cute factor aside, the film is a brilliant full circle AND evolution of the saga. Following on from the conclusion of "The Empire Strikes Back", Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill) follows his Rebel Alliance friends to Tatooine, his home planet, to rescue Han Solo (Harrison Ford), the space pirate turned Rebel hero who was captured by Jabba the Hutt for overdue debts.

Skywalker is a changed man since leaving Tatooine with Ben 'Obi Wan' Kenobi (Alec Guiness) to fight the evil Empire. Now swathed all in black, Luke's discovery of his origins have left him confused and torn. His psychological make up is not as strong as his outward appearance would suggest. While he might aim to always assist his Rebel friends, he yearns for another chance to confront the evil Darth Vader again, despite his unassuredness as to whether he will destroy him or eventually turn to the Dark Side and join Vader at the Emperor's side.

Early scenes in Tatooine are impressive, from Jabba's lair, to his floating palace and the 'almighty Sarlac' - an intenstine that lives in the sand. Lucas' CGI enhancements to the film in 1997 actually worsened the overall effect of the Sarlac, making it look fake and overdone.

The battle scene on Tatooine is outstanding, and is one of the more memorable of the saga. Luke almost singlehandedly anihiliates Jabba and his cronies, proving his prowess as a Jedi is now almost complete.

When Luke returns to the Degobah system to visit the ailing Yoda one more time, the viewer is let down by Yoda's distinct lack of screentime. Undoubtably the star of "The Empire Strikes Back", Yoda is all but erased from the story as the progression of Luke's destiny is played out on screen.

ROTJ really is Luke's film, perhaps even more so than the original. His journey carries the movie as he moves closer to his confrontation with Darth Vader and his fate. The other Rebel characters certainly work in his shadow. The romance between Leia (Carrie Fisher) and Solo is all but non-existant, unlike in "Empire". In fact only Leia's character is developed in ROTJ, Solo's character seems to fade as the facets of his personality have become too familiar in the first two films.

Their roles are consigned to working alongside the Rebels to destroy an all new Death Star that nears completion. This time the Emperor himself is overseeing the final stages of construction. The Empire intends to crush the Rebellion once and for all, while the Emperor himself schemes to bring the now powerful Skywalker to his side to work alongside (or is that replace?) Darth Vader. The Emperor is a different kind of evil for this film, less cunning than Governor Tarkin (Peter Cushing) from "Star Wars", more deeply psychologically dark than anything else. Played brilliantly by Ian McDiarmid, the Emperor is just one of those characters you love to hate.

All the other actors are well entrenched in their roles. Hamill surprises as the more wisened Luke, making his character's progression from whiny teenager, impatient student to enlightened warrior one of the few real character developments of the series. Ford's role is waring thin, as all his charm and charisma was spent in the first two films -- he was the REAL star of the first film after all. Fisher's Leia is more of a prop, at least unti the end of the film where she learns things about herself that she was never sure about... Add in favourites like Alec Guiness as Kenobi, Yoda and the loveable Chewbacca, C-3PO and R2D2 and the series resembles a family more than a cast.

Despite the film's corny forest battle involving the Ewoks and the Empire, it ends well and includes a three way battle sequence: on Endor, in space and on the Death Star, each with very impressive special effects. The music, as always, is brilliant and captures the mood perfectly in every instance. Just as the 'Blue Danube' worked perfectly for "2001: A Space Odyssey", John Williams' score is as much a part of "Star Wars" folklore as light sabers and the Force.

Lucas left the ending open to interpretation, meaning there could have been more episodes made. Indeed sci-fi fans have created their own versions of Episodes VII, VIII and IX in their heads over and over again. ROTJ works when given a chance, and furry cute animals aside is a good finish to the series.

When all six episodes get to be viewed together, this saga could well be the best ever made. Is it already? The addition of Episode I changed the landscape of the series. This is why "Return of the Jedi" can now be viewed in a different light and be given a whole new appreciation nearly 20 years after its release.

by Duncan Gowers (London, United Kingdom)

 

- idek - another fuckin essay what is wrong with you people



Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back | Review

Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back

Trailer

IMDb Page

 

 

Rank 11 as of 1/1/13)

Age Rating U

Year 1980

 

DISCLAIMER: this is NOT my review, as usual. I'm going to try to explain my hatred for these sort of movies... Space. Don't get me I find it very interesting, I really love to learn about it. However, I don't care for these stupid robots and princesses to be fighting in it. I just cant see the apply for watching that I cant even put it into words. So my reviews would be, 'it was shit'. And what is this Episode shit?


This is the 'most helpful' review from IMDb:

`It avoids having the standard shoot-'em-up ending,' says a friend of mine, `by not having an ending.' I suppose this is what most people think, but all the same the film manages to form a satisfying whole; or at least, a whole that satisfies me. I'm therefore inclined to think it DOES have an ending. Obviously, I can't discuss this without giving things away to those few who don't know what happens. If you're one of those few, then believe me: your ignorance is precious enough to be worth guarding until you see the film. Stop reading now.

After the surprise attack on the rebel base, Luke Skywalker splits with Han, Leia, et al. Han's party gets away first (is it just me, or is the shot of Luke watching the Falcon flying off while he stands stranded on the ground, a poignant one?), but thereafter they face one narrow escape after another, while Luke slinks off quietly and safely to train with Yoda.

The training scenes are many and Yoda talks a great deal of rubbish. But somehow it doesn't matter. The film is ambivalent in its attitude towards Yoda, anyway. Our sympathy clearly lies with the entirely non-spiritual concerns of Han, Leia and the adolescent Luke. The main story concerns the understanding that builds between Han and Leia. In the end they are honest with one another; and if Han's being frozen and shipped back to Tatooine is the price to pay for this, well, it's the price to pay. It was very important NOT to end with the dashing rescue that opens `Return of the Jedi', which would be dramatically beside the point. Instead we end with the promise that the rescue will some day occur. That's enough.

As for Luke: he abandons Yoda to rescue Han and Leia, and achieves NOTHING WHATEVER. This was my favourite touch. All five Jedis - Luke, Obi-Wan, Yoda, Vader, and the Emperor - find that their conflicting instincts are all entirely wrong. The film is really about the temporary triumph of human impulses over the mystical Force. Luke's human idealism is vindicated, but his supernatural powers, just this once, are not.

When George Lucas gave his Star Wars trilogy a fresh coat of varnish in 1997 he felt he had to justify the expense by making needless changes. You'll notice he made precious few changes to episode V. There just wasn't room. He added a few extra shots of the ice monster, which of course weakened that one scene; but even with those changes in place the Special Edition is virtually identical to the original edition. Since Lucas was so keen on making changes wherever he could this is obviously a tribute to the tightness of the story and the direction. It's also a tribute to the perfection of the original special effects, more innovative than the effects in the first Star Wars movie and better than the effects in any subsequent one.

 by Spleen (Canberra, Australia)

how do people right essays on Star Wars?

Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope | Review

Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope

IMDb Page

Trailer

Rank 16 as of 1/1/13)

Age Rating U

Year 1977

 

DISCLAIMER: this is NOT my review. Yet again I'm not reviewing this cos it will be bad and I'm not watching Star Wars. I've watched one for around 30mins and got so bored I couldn't cope, the thought of watching a whole moving makes me squirm. Soz to all the Star Wars fans out there, but may the force be with you.. wait is that Star Trek? I have no clue but whatever.

This is the 'most helpful' review from IMDb:
Star wars made epic fantasy real. For a generation of people it has defined what the cinema experience is meant to be. Today it is probable that pc games will offer a deeper and more satisfying entertainment solution, but for pure visual and aural pleasure, mixed with basic emotional manipulation, there has never and will never be a better example of cinema than when star wars appeared over 25 years ago. When you think of star wars, you must remember what else was happening at the time. In America, the war in Vietnam had been lost. In the U.K economic disaster was occurring(a 3 day working week, and the army collecting rubbish). It was almost like the two most technically advanced countries in the world were going backwards. Star wars let everybody escape from that reality and reach for a future that was uncertain but ultimately good.
by davidsarah Cornwall, England





Finally! A review that doesn't make mine look to shit! Woop woop! How well I am doing this month? ;)

The Hobbit | Review

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

IMDb Page

Official Trailer

 

 

Rank 122 as of 1/1/13)

Age Rating 12A

Year 2012

 

DISCLAIMER: this is NOT my review. I have put this review on here as I do not think that my review of this movie will be ok. As you now know I don't like Lord of the Rings, The Hobbit is basically Lord of the Rings, so therefore it will be shitty review, and quite frankly I don't have time to watch a movie I won't  like, sorry.

 

This is the 'most helpful' review from IMDb:

I was a mere child when I watched LOTR franchise and I still liked it. Ever since, year by year, I grew fonder and fonder of the movies and they remain, and probably forever will, one of my favorite movies of all time. I've read all the books countless times (including Hobit) and when I saw that Hobbit was coming into the cinema, my mind was entirely wiped away from its existence due to excitement that entered me.

Now, movie review.

As expected from Peter - almost flawless masterpiece. Given that he had a lot of material to work with, I imagine it was quite hard to put everything together for the scenery - yet he did it, once more. He captured the feeling of the book and transcended it onto a screen; of course, it was not solely his credit, to not be mistaken. The acting was amazing - perfectly fitting into fantasy style. The chemistry between actors was more than just the obvious - you could actually feel their interactions and live the story. Yes, it was that good.

I have no need to begin writing about camera work and all that comes with it; locations were beautiful, effects and colors were mixed perfect, a soundtrack that followed through pattered with what was going on perfectly ... it is really one of those moments when you simply can't say enough because you know, regardless of how many words you put in, you still won't be able to describe things the way you felt them. I have only one thing to say: congratulations Mr. Jackson and rest of the cast.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey will become classic without any doubt; I am just glad that I got to be a part of the generation that witnessed the never-dying franchise of Mr. Tolkien's work.

 

 By, Haris Krupalija                                                      

(Sarajevo, Bosnia)

 

I meant to be doing my History homework, not fuckin about 'writing' a review.

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King | Review

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King

IMDb Page

Official Trailer

 

Rank 8 as of 1/1/13)
Age Rating 12A
Year 2003

 

DISCLAIMER: this is NOT my review. I have put this review on here as I do not think that my review of this movie will be ok. Due to the fact that on the way back from a school trip, they put on Lord of the Rings 2. It was a 16 hour coach journey and something I really did not want to watch. I kept being woken up by swords and magical words. Grh. So therefore I HATE Lord of the Rings. Sorry.

 

This is the 'most helpful' review from IMDb:

The journey comes to an end. For me the final installment ensures that the Lord of the Rings replaces Star Wars as my favourite fantasy movie franchise. In time the film will look dated, but the story and characterisation far surpass that of Star Wars. The Empire Strikes Back is the only one of the Star Wars films that is in the same league as LOR.

As with Two Towers, the Return of the King doesn't recap the story so far, so don't even think of seeing this film if you're unfamiliar with the story. It starts with a flashback to Smeagol and means Andy Serkis gets to appear on the finished print. Frodo, Sam and Smeagol then continue on their quest, whilst the remaining members of the fellowship are briefly reunited at Isengard before taking different paths to Minas Tirith.

The action is unrelenting and most people will not notice the running time is over 3 hours. As with the previous films the combination of sets, models and cgi brings middle earth to life.

I suspect quite a few of the performers will be in with a chance of Oscar recognition. Miranda Otto is the stand out performer and is outstanding as Eowyn and surely deserves the Best Supporting Actress honour. I'm sure that Viggo Mortensen, Ian McKellen, Elijah Wood, Sean Astin, and Orlando Bloom will all have their supporters for acting honours and rightly so, as they all put in fine performances. I'm not sure whether Andy Serkis is elligable, but I suspect the success of Smeagol/Gollum owes as much to him as the animators. Bernhard Hill should also be in with a shout for recognition for his performance as King Theoden. My guess is that it'll miss out on the acting awards with the exception of Miranda Otto. It's absolutely certain to take Best Director, Best Picture and a string of technical awards though. My guess is that it will be nominated for about 12 categories and take 8 gongs.

Return of the King isn't flawless however. Saruman was cut entirely from the theatrical release of the film. We therefore missed out on the final face off between Gandalf and Saruman at Isengard. This was certainly filmed and will no doubt be on the extended edition. When the Hobbits return to the Shire it looks remarkably like when they left. No sign that Saruman has arrived back before them and taken over. In the book Merry, Pippin, Sam and Frodo help rally the rest of the Hobbits to retake the Shire, but at some cost to both the hobbits and the environment. Merry, Pippin and Sam become heros to the rest of the hobbits who are largely unaware of Frodo's adventure and exploits. I'm not sure if any of this was shot, but it would be a welcome addition to the extended addition. Personally I would have followed Tolkien and got rid of 7 minutes of Arwen footage and kept Saruman in. Bearing in mind Christopher Lee's passion for the trilogy it is also sad to see him removed from the final episode. I'm quite sure Peter Jackson must have had a few sleepless nights over that decision.

If Saruman's exclusion was the biggest blunder of the film, Gimli's consignment to comic interlude was also a bit disappointing. I'm not against a bit of light hearted relief every so often, especially in such a long film, but it seemed that every time Gimli appeared on screen it was for light entertainment. The "That still only counts as one" line to Legolas was very funny though.

Despite these gripes Peter Jackson can certainly be very proud of the Lord of the Rings. Very few people thought it possible to do justice to the book. He has crafted a film that many people will enjoy for many years.

By,
Andrew Marshall (United Kingdom)



You getting used to this yet? Ha.

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers | Review

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers

Official Trailler

IMDb Page

 

 

 

Rank 21 as of 1/1/13)
Age Rating 12A
Year 2002

 

DISCLAIMER: this is NOT my review. I have put this review on here as I do not think that my review of this movie will be ok. Due to the fact that on the way back from a school trip, they put on Lord of the Rings 2. It was a 16 hour coach journey and something I really did not want to watch. I kept being woken up by swords and magical words. Grh. So therefore I HATE Lord of the Rings. Sorry.

 

This is the 'most helpful' review from IMDb:

 

We have been waiting an entire year for this one!!! The Two Towers picks up right where last years Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring leaves off. The director, Peter Jackson, did not include a recap of the last movie, so if you don't remember what happened in the first movie you better rent it and refresh your memory before you head off to the theater.

When we last left our fellowship, it had splintered apart. Frodo Baggins (Elijah Wood) and Sam Gamgee (Sean Astin) continue there quest to return the all powerful and evil ring to Mordor where it can be destroyed. They take on the creature Gollum (Andy Serkis) as their guide to Mordor despite Gollum's obsession with getting `his precious' back. Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen), Legolas (Orlando Bloom), and Gimli (John Rhys-Davies) begin by trying to find the kidnapped Merry (Dominic Monaghan) and Pippin (Billy Boyd), but end up getting caught up in a battle to save a race of humans. The evil wizard Saruman (Christopher Lee), controlled by Dark Lord Sauron created a grand Uruk-hai army that is sent to destroy the race of Humans at the fortress Isengard. The presumed dead Gandolf (Ian McKellen) also returns to lend his assistance in battling Lord Sauron's troops.

This film was better paced than the first in the trilogy. There were still some breaks in the action that were a little dull, but the dialog was necessary to further the story. With three separate stories going on simultaneously between the three groups of the splintered fellowship, the film kept the action moving quickly. Clocking in at 179 minutes, it is just one minute longer than the first film. This time, I didn't mind the length. The battle for Isengard comprised about a third of the film, and it was very intense.

The rest of the film had a lot of the same excellent cinematic shots as the first movie. The shots tracking the actors from above (done by helicopter) with the beautiful New Zealand mountains and countryside in the background were just amazing. The landscapes helped to keep me involved with the story when the action slowed for dialog intensive scenes.

The creature Gollum played a very key roll in this movie, and the computer-generated character was very lifelike and amusing. He reminded me of Dobby the `house elf' in Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. Gollum and the Dwarf were the two main comic relief characters in this very serious film.

To conclude, we had to wait a year for this film, and it lived up to expectations! A final reminder…this is the middle film in the trilogy so you can expect another ending that leaves you wanting more! Not to worry though, the third and final film is due out next Christmas.

 

By,

 Justin Chan (Philadelphia, Pa)

 

 

Sorry (not sorry) again for it not being my review. :)

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring | Review

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring          

IMDb Page  

Official Trailler

 

 

Rank 13 as of 1/1/13)
Age Rating PG
Year 2001

 

 

DISCLAIMER: this is NOT my review. I have put this review on here as I do not think that my review of this movie will be ok. Due to the fact that on the way back from a school trip, they put on Lord of the Rings 2. It was a 16 hour coach journey and something I really did not want to watch. I kept being woken up by swords and magical words. Grh. So therefore I HATE Lord of the Rings. Sorry.

 

This is the 'most helpful' review from IMDb:

 

The reason why this first part of Jackson's 'Lord of the Rings' is superior to his latter two parts is because of restraint. Jackson was restrained from over doing it with the CGI and "epic" battle sequences, which in my opinion does not make a story epic. Part of the reason was simply because Tolkien did not have very many battles in the first part of his book, which thankfully forced Jackson to focus on creating a believable world rather than a believable hack-n-slash action movie.

I don't find much entertainment in watching people mutilate each other, but I love it when a movie engages me in a world, and 'The Fellowship of the Ring' does just that. Certainly the most breathtaking scenes in the movie are the moments of patient observation, when the camera pans around and captures the beautiful settings of Middle Earth. I must give Jackson credit. He did hire some very extraordinary artists that have envisioned one of the grandest interpretations of Tolkien's world.

There are about five particular moments that stick out in my mind and gave me that tingle of goosebumps down my spine when I saw them for the first time. The first is the introduction to Hobbiton. After the somewhat awkward prologue, I was beginning to have my doubts to whether the movie would live up to the book. But the movie surprised me. Hobbiton is perfect. The houses have flower patches and old fences, the roads look worn and made through decades of travel, and the Old Mill spins with the laziness of a quiet town. Every color is vibrant and every moment looks as through it was taken out of a picture book. Although I still don't agree with the particular look of the Hobbits, I believe everything else in Hobbiton is worthy of Tolkien's words.

The second moment comes after Frodo's awakening in Rivendell, and the third, during the exploration of the Halls of Moria. In both moments, the camera pans away from the characters and outward into a static shot of their surroundings. The moments make us feel like we're turning our heads and gazing at the world around us just as the characters do. The golden waterfalls of the elven city mark an interesting contrast with the dark halls of the dwarfish mines, but each are inspiring in their own ways and add to feeling of being engaged in a living world.

My other favorite moments come during the exploration of Lothlorien and the passage down the Anduin. And while I won't go into detail about the scenes, since they really should be experienced without any prior expectations, they are monuments in imaginative cinema. 'The Fellowship of the Ring' is one of those rare movies that I always wish I could reexperience for the first time. Unfortunately, Jackson turned away from exploring Middle Earth in his next two movies, and instead, turned to fighting and warfare. He seems to take a lot of pride in the love story and battle sequences he created in 'The Two Towers' and 'The Return of the King,' but it is was in his first movie when he really got it right. In 'The Fellowship of the Ring,' it's okay if the characters are uninteresting and have silly dialogue. Middle Earth is the star, and the characters are the ones seeing it for the first time.

 

By,
David D Lowery (Chicago)    

 

 

 

Sorry for my absence and not even writing a review but I was not gunna watch LOTR. Oh and FYI i'm not watching the others either. Soz.

---



The Bourne Ultimatum | Review

The Bourne Ultimatum

IMDb Page

Trailer

 

 

Rank 175 as of January 1st 2013)
Age Rating 12A
Year 2007

 

I wasn't expecting this to be on the list at all. Especially as this is the last in the Bourne Trilogy (The Bourne Identity | The Bourne Supremacy), the last ones are always meant to be the worst right? But no, this was the best one. Apparently very good in sound editing and stuff (it won Oscars for it)!

 

It follows the story of a man who lost his memory and is trying to find out who he his and why he lost his memory and who he really is. The storyline did get a little ridiculous. But it's exciting and action-packed, it is an action movie after all.

 

I do I have a bit of a soft-spot for Matt Damon after watching Good Will Hunting (review) I love him, yes he's like 40 but I don't care. Anyway! I'm glad to see another of his films on list. He deserves it. It was another great performance from him, Go Matt.

 

Remember everything. Forgive nothing.

 

 

By Georgina,

28/08/2013

Stand By Me | Review

Stand By Me

IMDb Page

Trailer

 

 

Rank 175 as of January 1st 2013)
Age Rating 15
Year 1986

 

I apologise in advance for the non-goodness of this review. Its 2:42 in the morning, I can't really see my keyboard and most importantly I haven't wrote a review in over one month, oh dear.

 

So, Stand By Me. Well, what a film. It's so good. Everything about it, its perfect almost! The 'child' actors, I think, did the best job that any child actors have ever done, giving the movie so much depth and feeling.

It's based around 4 friends in the summer of '59  who, when finding out where the body of a boy that had gone missing is they go on a search to find the body as to become famous for being the people who found it. 

 

Stand By Me is about friendship, apparently the best kind is when you are at the age of 12, which they all were. But these four friends all do have things, that would hold them back lets say. Gordie, who when he is an adult, narrates the film. He lost his older brother 4 months before the search of the body. He had become 'the invisible child', ignored by his parents. Vern is the fat kid of the group and of course he always gets teased and the mick taken out of him. Teddy's father is abusive, yet Teddy still always stands up for him, much to the others amazement. He often makes remarks on how his father fought at the beaches in Normandy (WWII). Chris, the leader of the group as such, comes from a family who are all 'bad'. He wished that he can get somewhere in life, but his family's reputation disallows him to do it.

 

This movie is timeless, it can be enjoyed by all generations. Not to mention the perfect soundtrack.

 

Fuck writing, I don't want to be a writer. It's stupid. It's a stupid waste of time.

 

By Georgina,
27/08/2013

 

 

 

Shutter Island Review

Shutter Island

IMDb Page

Official Trailer

Rank 234 as of January 1st 2013)

Age Rating 15
Year 2010

 

What is it with all these mindmessingup movies on this list?! But mind you, they are great! Shutter Island is scary, scary without being to gory. It's plays with your emotions. It even makes you question reality, weird uh?

Of course the famous Leonardo DiCaprio is in this movie, and of course, he is fabulous! Portraying his two (sort of) characters. His supporting actor Mark Ruffalo is also great, along with the rest of the cast. Especially Ben Kingsley, he makes you distrust him, hate him, trust him and then distrust and hate him again! Wow. My emotions are everywhere.

The storyline was great and really original, (I know that was because of the book but you know what I mean) I thought I knew what was going to happen and etc etc and it was going to be a big fight and etc etc! But NO! Oh NO! I did not see the twist in the tale that I expected. Watch out for it!


By Georgina,
25/07/2013

Black Swan Review

Black Swan

Official Trailler

IMDb Page

 

 

Rank 177 as of January 1st 2013)

Age Rating 15
Year 2010

 

I don't know what it was about this film, but, my god, it really really creeped me out. I don't know why! After it ending I had to watch some light-hearted comedy to clear my head (The Inbetweeners FYI), it was so weird. I think it may have been the sort of self-harmy, hallucinations side of it that weirded me out so much, My nonetheless, it really was fabulous.



 

Natalie Portman, my god girl, you were incredible! The Oscar was very well deserved. Infact so was everyone, Mila Kunis stole the... screen!?  When she was in the scenes, so did Vincent Cassel. All were amazingly weird and fantastic!

 

The story was excellent, as well as creepy! How do you people come up with such things, it amazes me!! Beautiful directing - Just a really great movie with an incredibly dark undertone! Thank you for giving me nightmares.

 

By Georgina,

8/07/13

 

 

To Kill A Mockingbird Review

To Kill a Mockingbird

IMDb Page

Official Trailer

 

Rank 67 as of January 1st 2013)

Age Rating PG/A
Year 1962

 

 I wasn't sure whether I was gunna like this film, simply because its in black and white, I know, its such a 21st century kid thing to say, but its true! However, I loved it. And the black and white was perfect.

Based on Harper Lee's novel (To Kill A Mockingbird, which I now really want to read!) about Alabama in the Depression era, where you follow the lives Atticus Finch and his children (Scout and Jem) where he defends a black man accused of rape. As you know I like a bit of controversy, so the storyline was great!

Everyone played their parts really well, Mary Badham was really great as Scout! And of course Gregory Peck was fabulous as Atticus, cool, calm and collected!

Overall, I loved this movie! It's a definite one to watch, a real eye-opener to how shit some people had in them days. How racist it was, I was quite shocked!

By Georgina,
23/06/13

Its my birthday today, woop.

Donnie Darko Review

Donnie Darko

IMDb Page

Official Trailer

 

 

Rank 176 as of January 1st 2013)

Age Rating 15
Year 2001

 

Oh lordy, this was great. My mind is once again blown. Superb, may I say!

 

Following the story of a messed up teenager, hating the boredom school, not really liking many people, including his family, Donnie Darko meets frank a 7ft tall, metal faced rabbit, who helps him escape from a freak accident.

 

Amazingly, acted. Although, I was disappointed to not see this movie winning any Oscars, or BAFTAs, it deserved it so much! Everyone acted their role perfectly, it was top-notch casting!

 

It was an incredibly weird, and confusing film, there isn't a specific reason to why everything happened, there is a lot of interpretations. Maybe that's why people don't understand it and stuff, I don't know! I loved it!

 

The movie was creepy and sinister, yet it barely centre around violence or blood (it's not creepy like Silence of the Lambs say!).

 

Overall, this is a fantastic movie and definitely one worth a watch if you like abstract films or you're just an avid film watcher!

 

By Georgina,

15/06/13

 

It's my birthday next Sunday! - parddaaaaaay! I have exams at the moment as well, so sorry for lack of reviews! Also, I don't know whether this was the directors cut or not, sorry!

A really good website for explaining every thing if you are slightly confused is this, but do NOT read  this before you watch the movie

 

Inglorious Basterds Review

Inglorious Basterds

IMDb Page

Official Trailer 

 

Rank 113 as of January 1st 2013)

Age Rating 18
Year 2009

 

 

Another unconventional movie on the IMDb Top 250 list from Mr Tarantino. Obviously, its marvellous. It's such a 'me' film. It's political and slightly controversial like all of Quentin's movies, but I like politics and controversy. So it screams greatness. It's also fairly random, like all his movies. But wow. So fantastic.

I love movies with subtitles, which this movie has a fair amount of. I don't know why, maybe I'm strange. But I think they add a depth to it. Oh I don't know! (I like trying to translate the French, I'm doing it as a GCSE.)

Perfecto casting, everyone was totally great. Especially you, Mr Pitt! You were exceptionally aberrant. And Christoph Waltz. Man, you were outstandingly eccentric. Both of you were phenomenal.

But why Quentin Tarantino do you have to make your movies so bloody gory?! The scalping. Oh sweet Jesus. And the 'branding'. Bloody hell. I never knew whether to laugh, cry, turn away or feel incredibly tense and sick. Ah.

I'm so glad I liked this movie because I didn't particularly like Reservoir Dogs, though I really do want to! ha ha! So, thank god I like this. Quentin, your back in my ranks of being great.

Georgina,
1/06/2013

June. Bloody hell. It's my birthday in 22 days. Woop.




The Lion King Review

The Lion King

IMDb Page

Official Trailer

 



 

Rank 79 as of January 1st 2013)

Age Rating U
Year 1994

 

Just the classic family Disney movie. A real sing-a-long and all! It can entertain anybody, whether you be 94 or just 94 days old. The Lion King will be for you!

 

It's good animation for its time (I think?!) and the vocals are really good - I haven't heard of any of them though.

 

It's probably the best children's movie and one of the best animated! The story is great, teaching about responsibility, as well as coping with death.

 

It's funny, sad, happy, it has songs, dances, jokes. Its the whole package in one movie of greatness!

 

 

 

'Oh I just can't wait to king!'

 

 

 

 

Georgina,

31/05/2013

 

Sorry for shortness.