Four Eyed Monsters
Advertisement
Sign in
Username   Password         Forgot password?
Wanna join? Tour Spout | Sign up
Find movies you'll love

The_American_Dream Blog

  • Sunshine

    Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]
    Under discussion:

    Sunshine  (2007)

    Wow. A cool movie. There has not been a really cool movie since after the first “Matrix” came out. This was also a movie that I was looking forward to. One look at the teaser and I was hooked. I was gonna see that movie and I did. Loved it.

    Admittedly the plot is simple and follows the formulaic plot of many disaster movies: implausible problem+a bunch of guys+a few girls+cool vehicles+expendable character of ethnic minority+big explosions=usual disaster movie. And yeah it does follow that formula almost to the word. But!!!! this is still an amazing movie. Amazing to watch, amazing characters, amazing effects, over all it was just amazing to go to the theater and see it.

    If you have read the other reviews out there you will see that each one says something about it being “visually stunning” all that is true to the word, and then beyond. Every frame of this film is a visual masterpiece I swear to you to look at it is not in the least disappointing and that is indisputable. Through out we see eyes. As their ship puts a dark pupil in the sun, and the ship its self has an eye shape, and how the audience if ever reminded that looking at the sun will kill you (on the ship they can only look at the sun at 2% of it’s full brightness with the naked eye they can see 3.1% with sunglasses for 30 seconds and 4% would kill them). The light and dark, reds, greens, whites and blacks all work so beautifully together and make an amazing movie. And more over the cinematography is different then what we normally see in disaster movies of the same caliber.

    The setting of the film is space, in the future where the sun is slowly fading out and earth is freezing more with everyday. Still the sun is dangerous to the 8 crew aboard the Icarus II as they go off on the last hope of man kind to re-start the sun with a thermonuclear bomb with the mass of Manhattan. Okay there is the premies of the movie. Now for the twist. SPOILER FOLLOWS: The Icarus I was lost 7 years before the mission that we are following. The Icarus II goes over to the Icarus I on their way to the Sun just to see if there is any thing that might aid them (by this point they have all ready lost most of their oxygen and at least one crew member. Well there is nothing over there that they can see but they un-knowingly bring over a boogie-man form Icarus I and for some relatively unexplained reason he wants to stop their mission there by killing all of man kind. END OF SPOILERS. So there is the plot for you. It is far more straightforward than other disaster movies.

    The acting is not the major focus of this picture, none the less it is far above the standards of your usual disaster movie. And there is much more ensemble in the cast than other movies. Each character is able to do their role believably within the boundaries of the script and not over or under play at any time.

    The effects are amazing. You really could not tell. There has not been that level of believability in effects since “The Matrix”. Although you know that it would have been impossible to have been there it looks like it could happen. 

    Lastly, just go see this movie I swear you will not be disappointed. There really is something here for everyone. And it has a really hopeful and good ending that leaves the world a better place (as opposed to a frozen dump like in “The Day After Tomorrow” or bombed to kingdom come as in “Independence Day”). It is cool and interesting and does not really have any obvious bad points.


  • A Scanner Darkly

    Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]
    Under discussion:

    A Scanner Darkly  (2006)

    Defiantly not the best. It is worth seeing, and interesting to watch. The rotoscopeing is (as anyone could tell at first glance is cool). But did it add anything? Not really. I think I would be righting the same review if it was not rotoscoped. But it defiantly gives it a very interesting look.

    What is this movie about? Well it is 100 minutes about being addicted to drugs. There are allot of movies out there like that. The ones that spring to my mind (“Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas” and “Blow”) both star Johnny Depp and I liked both more than this. I know people are saying “Oh look at this movie and all its psychological aspects. Think of the depth of the characters and the deep performances.” Look I am sorry to say but it does not take allot of effort for a person to pretend (or not pretend) to be drugged up and say “It’s all in the mind dude. Think about it.” For most of it it is just regular drugged up people, they live in a trashed house and dope up every other chance on LSD or [as it was called in the movie] ‘Substance-D’.

    I know the fans of this movie out there are saying “This guy doesn’t know what he is talking about.” And in some way, you are right. But I know what makes a good movie and I am sorry you fans, this is not it. It is not a very long movie and yet I found my self loosing interest after a while. It just kind of kept going over and over, rather like this review, and it is that that really makes the audience loose interest. It is still not a “Well I will never get those 100 minutes back” kind of movie. And the ending is very well executed, but still that did not save the rest of the movie.

    There are a whole bunch of great actors in this and although it was not like their performances went to waste, this movie is sure not any high point for them. As for the rotoscopers, this movie took 18 months post production. And I think that the people who did all the rotoscoping for this should each get some kind of metal for their work. Again not that it went to waste but still I do not think it was totally worth their while.

    By all means see this movie but it is not a great. And for me turned out to be somewhat of a disappointment.


  • "Lords of Dogtown" review

    Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]
    Under discussion:

    Lords of Dogtown  (2005)

    “Lords of Dogtown” is based on the true story of skateboarders Stacy Peralta, Tony Alva, and Jay Adams who (starting in 1975) revolutionized the skateboarding industry into what we associate with the sport today. Well that is a real short overview of the movie, which like most biographical or historical covered a very long stretch of time with allot of character development, even when the acting was not en-captivating as other movies it it served this movies purpose.

    Since (as I said) the movie takes place over such a long stretch of time and captures so much of the people, one can safely say that the righting on this film is for the most part exceptional. I will however say this (to some extent the contrary of what I just said) that the time frame was not always clear. There were three intervals in the film where a date was given. And yet it seemed as though it could not have only happened in the space of only three years. That was really my only problem with it. It was still not the best ever. 

    There was however, one absolutely, totally amazing, just flat out awesome aspect of this movie. The camera. Not like the camera moves or angles, most of which were interesting particularly when the point of view was under the boards. It was when they did that for the first time really rather early on in the movie that I just got blown away. I thought that was the coolest thing ever. I guess, thinking back on it now it was not that amazing but to see it was just cool and for that scene where the camera is under the boards I would say it was original and cool enough to make me want to watch through all the less cool footage.

    But that was not the only cool thing about the look of the film, for allot of the films cinematography is also interesting. Blues when they are in the pools that often gives the look of such scenes an odd, dream like look to them. Often a limitless look as the pools curves make it so the blue is infinite, kinda like the way white is used throughout “THX 1138”. All summed up the film is quite interesting to look at.

     


  • Chaplin Review

    Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]
    Under discussion:

    Chaplin  (1992)

    I know that everyone says this about this movie, but I am going to have to say it again just for the record; Robert Downey Jr’s performance is truly one of greatness (as are those of the supporting cast). His transformation is (as I have said) striking to say the least. And people say all that rather often so I shall not linger on it and get right to talking about the movie...

    The plot is vast, as plots must be with biographical films such as this and movies such as Wilde and MalcolmX, and as one can imagine this is always difficult for screenwriters. But this movie gives credit to the ability of filmmakers to take a whole lifetime and roll it into but 135 minutes. And then to maintain the detail needed to make such a film believable is again one of the great feats of film. One that is not found often. 

    So, as I have discussed this is a film or rare quality. And yet, it received only three nominations at the 1993 Academy Awards and won none of them. To say the least this is a travesty for such a masterwork.

    This does not mean that it was not without flaw. To name one that bugged me in particular; the way Chaplin’s early life is portrayed as one of almost Horatio Alger style. Now I have not read the book that it is based upon (so I cannot say that this segment of the movie does not capture the feel of the book) nor can I say that Chaplin’s beginnings were not miserable. But scenes such as the one after his mother is booed of the stage and he (presumably at age 5) wins the hearts of the tuff crowd with his charming [presumingly age 5] rendition of the same act are really to corny for me. This is not the only one but it was by far the most irritating (so I am decided to take the time to rat it out as opposed to the other similar scenes).

    None the less,  Chaplin  is all and all a worthwhile 135 minutes of film to say the very least and I recommend it to all. There is really something great about it as a medley of comedy, drama, with (rather erotic) romances through out. There is something in it for just about everyone. 


 

Like what you're reading?

Subscribe
Search
  Go

Browse previous
<July 2007>
SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
24252627282930
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930311234


Categories
 


Advertisement