Holly Jolly's Profile - Rotten Tomatoes

Want-to-See Movies

This user has no Want to See movie selections yet.

Want-to-See TV

This user has no Want to See TV selections yet.

Rating History

The Hunger Games
5 years ago via Rotten Tomatoes

If you read the book it seems like you will like it decently. If you did not read the book like me then you will clearly see that the movie fails to properly explain itself. The characters are fairly boring and their interactions barely become interesting.

While watching 'The Hunger Games' I couldn't help but think I could have been watching Gladiator again, and actually enjoying myself.

They have such similar ideas. Slaves forced into killing games, audiences that find it entertaining and government heads that struggle to keep the popularity of the people due to the noble exploits of the main character. The difference is Maximus is a much more compelling character with a more complex goal. Gladiator is essentially a revenge film. We want the main character to venge Commodus because he is an extremely wicked man who has deceitfully taken the emperor's crown and affectively destroyed Maximus's entire life. The antagonist is a real challenge to the protagonist. We are not sure if Maximus's lawful nobility and brawn will be able to overcome the villain's unruled evil and wit. Maximus must learn to patiently outwit the villain in a game without rules as his physical strengths are literally drained from him. That's dynamic and interesting. The true power of Gladiator though is that it elevates itself beyond a mere revenge film. The theme is not about justice, but about inner peace. While the main character loses his physical battle he wins in his spiritual battle.

So is Hunger Games a revenge film? No. Alright so what is its motivation? Survival? Alright, so the goal is to not die, or in reality show terms, not get voted off. Okay, I guess that is...maybe interesting.

Also where are the character dynamics being challenged in the Hunger Games? Seneca Crane (guy with the crazy beard) is much like Commodus in that he is a sniffling young jerk who is trying to please the greater body of people, but why? He doesn't even seem to be the real ruler. President Snow is the real ruler, Crane seems to be a mere jester. In Gladiator Commodus's character is established by him killing the Emperor, his own father, so that he can keep the kingdom out of Maximus's hands. Crane meanwhile does absolutely nothing. He's some rich brat just like Commodus, but as far as we know he hasn't done anything evil, he is simply allowing these killing games proceed, just like everyone else watching. He hasn't personally killed anyone, and he never personally sought out to ruin the main character's life, this futuristic society in general did that. So is society the real villains here? So what does that make the people actually gleefully watching this film? Do they not perpetuate this sense of thrill in seeing children kill each other? Even if this is accurate the sense of a real antagonist is never present and is fairly obtuse and intangible.

Oh right, there are those blood thirsty children from district one and two right? So what is so compelling about them? They are trained killers that we assume are better off, at least they act like rich bratty equivalents of high school jocks and cheerleaders. So I guess that would make bookworms naturally hate them. Where as Katniss is a poor, personally trained killer from West Virgina, uh I mean District 12, who doesn't...like killing other children. So how exactly is this compelling?

At least with Commodus we get the feeling that he has deeper goals. He wants power, but he also wants to be well liked by the people of Rome just as his father was. How does he try to achieve this? He brings Gladiators back into the Colosseum because the citizens enjoy the blood sports. This backfires because it brings Maximus back into his life because he has become a slaved fighter.

The main evil kid from District 1 is tall, mean and slaughters a bunch of kids. Obviously he wants to win, but why? It isn't because he is afraid of losing, he volunteered for this blood fest after all. If he wins will District 1 give him 40 young virgins? Will he get a treasure? Will his father finally love him? Why would other people team up with him? He is obviously going to kill you, the rules say there can only be one winner after all. Things aren't adding up.

I feel like what should have happened is that because Katniss is such an awesome hunter the capital city requests that she 'volunteer' for the Yum-yum Games because the previous season they had fairly poor viewer ratings and they need to make sure they have a much more dynamic game of challengers in the next season. She obviously refuses. So weird beard secretly sends in District 1 killer kids to slay Katniss's younger sister and prozac popping mother. They accuse her of murder and the punishment for murder is automatic qualification for the din-din games. Gale (Katniss's true love, but you wouldn't really know it in the movie) does everything in his power to get his name in the raffle as many times as he can so he can get selected and help save Katniss. (Which is way more interesting then giving her a piece of starchy bread.) But Peta, savior to animals, gets picked instead. Katniss's opposite in every way possible. Oh how he hates that Peta...but he's so freakin hot! Isn't that a more compelling plot? Of course it is my silly book reading, uncultured cinematic children!

Oh, and one more thing. Why should I care so much about the cute little african american girl being killed? I know, she was a doll, but that's it. The main character bonds with her for about three minutes of screen time. So I don't believe their shallow relationship whatsoever. In Gladiator when one of Maximus's friends die we have spent much more time with them, time in which a bond beyond whistling has been established.

Educate yourselves please.

Patlabor 2
Patlabor 2 (1993)
7 years ago via Rotten Tomatoes

Decently confusing when one jumps right in.

Patlabor 2 can be enjoyed on its own but without seeing the first movie or the anime show the character interactions aren?t quite clear. Thankfully the debates about war and terror are very clear and paint a very realistic picture of what could happen in Japan?s future. The animation is good but limited and lacks the extreme detail of panning shots that the original Ghost in the Shell is famous for.

I give this film a 6.5 out of 10.0. If you enjoy the Ghost in the Shell movies the same director does a good job injecting his grand ability for provoking thoughts but the action and character interest can disappoint.

Whisper of the Heart (Mimi wo sumaseba) (If You Listen Closely)
7 years ago via Rotten Tomatoes

A pinnacle in animation and film that proclaims the need for reformation in the modern industry.


Whisper of the Heart is yet another entry from Studio Ghibli that showcases its rare abilities to cultivate life?s most precious moments without crushing them. Truly what it proclaims through its title, a gentle whisper that speaks directly to your heart. This was Yoshifumi Kondo?s fist directed film and would sadly be his last as he died just a few years later. His mentor the famed director Miyazaki wrote the screenplay and suggested his own retirement out of directing animation. He would later change his mind and go on to direct some of the most powerful and important films ever made. (Princess Mononoke, Spirited Away, Howl?s Moving Castle)


This has a unique touch of being partly a Miyazaki film but ends up highlighting different parts of a similar story base. This is the kind of true to life teenage drama you will never find produced in America. In most minds to stay true to life first and foremost their must be cussing, drugs, sex and betrayal. Is this true to a teenager?s modern life? Whisper of the Heart declares a sense of hope for mankind as it outlines the specific search for the inner soul that transfigures us from a carnal nature. Yes, it is rated G and Disney doesn?t seem to understand how such a title could enter a market that revolves around Shrek and other crude accents into temporary pop-humor.


If you are already a rabid fan of Studio Ghibli?s work then Whisper of the Heart is a great change of scenery. It brings the magic of Miyazaki?s fantasy worlds into a modern day Japan and the transition is a delight. This is one of the greatest of all time, eclipsing both Gone with the Wind and Titanic as an important tale of what love is today, and how it is as important as ever to not only find your love, but yourself.


I give this film a 10 out of 10. Very powerful. Hopefully one day North America will catch up with what the rest of the world already treasures.

Angels & Demons
8 years ago via Rotten Tomatoes

The overall idea, debate and pacing is much better than the original, 'The Da Vinci Code.' However by the end the twists and turns and any growth within the characters keep it from being at all rewarding. As I think one critic said, it isn't very smart, and it isn't very fun. It is far from a bad movie but I have a hard time seeing why I would watch it again any time soon.

Worth watching, some of the twists just did not sit well with me, but they do however work.

National Treasure was better than The Da Vinci Code, and Angels and Demons is better than National Treasure 2.

I give this movie a 6.5 out of 10.0.

How To Be
How To Be (2008)
8 years ago via Rotten Tomatoes

There are a couple amusing parts and interesting insights in this low budget indy film, but the overall story and idea is severely lacking. It took a lot of effort to bear it till the end.

I give this...thing a .05 out of 10.0. Just avoid it.