Maineutral R.'s Movie Ratings - Rotten Tomatoes

Movie Ratings and Reviews

Warrior King 2 (The Protector 2)

Something these movies need to learn is that there's only so much suspension of disbelief we can do, and there's so much action we can take in one movie. The Protector 2 is even worse than the first one; whereas the first one had some good action scenes. This one has a lot of them, some of them lasting forever. When you execute an action scene, you don't just stretch it to fill the movie; you still have to give a pair of story scenes. But here, we're caught between two bad parallels: when there's action, only the first few minutes are good, but when you get tired of it, the action doesn't stop, as there's like 20 more minutes of it. And when there's no action (yes, they do stop like 3 times in the movie) there's a boring story and stale characters saying horrible lines. Literally, lines, no dialogue at all. It's all the movie is: a cheesy, too over-the-top action film with horrible dialogue. Not one funny moment, not one moment to care about anything. Add horrible editing and special effects to the mix and you get The Protector 2.

You get so tired of the action in this movie that you constantly keep thinking to yourself: "What's this leading to?" Nothing, of course. It's just of fill the movie, or whatever the hell this is. The first stunts are already pretty impossible, but the movie dares to escalate its own ridiculousness, to the point where it becomes too much even for its own insanity. There's a lot of impossible over-the-top movements; one of them actually has Tony Jaa against one of the bad guys while standing in their wet feet on electric rails, resulting in them literally lightning-bending. Add Star Wars lightsaber sounds to that...and you just lost it, and the movie only keeps getting worse. This was just horrible and laughably bad to watch, the only thing that keeps it from being something really, really awful, is the fact that it's better than Manos: The Hands of Fate. But its likeable meter is similar to that of Transformers: Age of Extinction, with the exception that this one is just a bad movie, whereas Trans4mers makes you feel like the movie hates you.

The Protector 2 however is one of the worst action films I've seen. There are worse, but this one was just all over the place and never got into it because the movie never let me. For the sake of Tony Jaa's career and talent, I hope his next action movie (Fast / Furious 7, his American debut) turns out good, so people can see him as a talented fighting star, and not an overblown one.

The Cabin in the Woods
½

Tired of modern horror movies? The answer is always yes. Well, don't worry, as Joss Whedon and Drew Goddard have the perfect cure: The Cabin in the Woods. Yes, all those tired cliches and torture porn will be put to the test in this movie, which pretty much does what Scream did years ago, except that this IS genuinaly good.

The best way to review this movie is without any spoilers at all. I won't tell even the character's names, or even what it's about. I'll just going to say that you should really watch it and discover everything by yourself, everything about why is it so good. Just go and see Cabin in the Woods, then we can actually talk about this one. It's totally worth it.

Reservoir Dogs
½

Tarantino's first film is uneven and violent. It's a 100% totally his. Reservoir Dogs is a unique experience, which shows that the before and after of a heist can be much more interesting than the heist itself; after all, the film never shows us the actual heist, but the preparations and the aftermath, and is thanks to Tarantino's scriptwriting talents that it works. While not entirely what I wanted and expected to see, the film still makes-up with its uniqueness.

The cast is awesome and does all-right as expected, but we don't get too deep on them, which fits, after all, we are not supposed to. Even so, it still makes a huge impact. The story is told in a non-linear way (again, Tarantino's direction), similar yet very different to Christopher Nolan's Memento or David Lynch's Eraserhead. Because of the tension and anxiety of not knowing what's going on, the violence here works as a nerve-pumping method that increases fear. I've heard and read of people actually walking out from this movie because the violence was too much. It's not that it's incredibly gory, it's just that it's effective. Some modern horror directors and writers should look at this picture for some good advice. Still, after watching, I had no idea what it was about. It's hard to tell, but it all comes together when you think about it twice.

All I have left to say is that this is a good movie, and surely got my nerves when it wanted to. It has a style and approaches the most of it. It's not perfect, but it surely acts like it.

Brick Mansions

A straight-up, cliché-driven action film that can be entertaining at times, but mostly obnoxious. Brick Mansions is a remake of District B13 (which I have not seen, but I wish) adapted by Luc Besson, who often makes good AND bad action films. This film is also post-Paul Walker's death, meaning this could have acted as a great tribute to such beloved actor...but simply mentioning his participation in this film disgraces his well-known name.

The problem with Brick Mansions is the lack of plot. Let's just say I think the script was only 50 pages long, and the rest was covered with lousy and choppy action scenes to make it last an hour and a half. The movie is so busy in showing entertainment that it forgets to develop actual stories, and thus, the twists and change of sides are merely forced-up our asses. The dialogue has a lot of awful lines and even the countless action scenes are problematic. First of all, the editing and camerawork on them are atrocious. The camera moves too much and uses a lot of close-ups and quick cuts, and some of the cuts don't follow well the action. So, yeah, there's a lot of action scenes, but all of them filmed with the same problems, resulting in not being as much fun as it should. Overall, the movie has little to nothing to offer, that without saying that the movie follows pretty much every action cliché in the worst way possible.

Brick Mansions is just an average and forgettable action movie, but definitely is not awful. It still entertained me, but I expected to have fun, which is not the same. It's not one of the worst of this year, but surely is one of the most forgettable.

Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance

I'll say right away that I think both Ghost Rider and the sequel are equally bad for me. Both have the same faults, or even if they have different ones, the overall level of awfulness generated by them are in the same level. With that said, this stand-alone sequel has one or two cool things, but it's not worth it. The story didn't get any better or bigger, the characters are one-dimensional trash and the movie is not really all that fun, it's mostly a bore...you know, just like the first one.

Nicolas Cage does his classic rampage acting that was absent from the previous one, but appears only slightly (if you want to see him going all-out jam, better watch Face/Off) and when he is Ghost Rider, he's mostly acting all quiet and rather quick, so much that you can't catch a thing with your human eyes. It's basically drugs. And we shouldn't be surprised by that, as the director of this movie is the Neveldine & Taylor duo, who is known for the Crank movies starring Jason Statham. Those movies have the character needing some kind of element to be in full energy mode. That creates a lot of drug-inducing-like sequences, which the duo know how to do very well. They forgot to put the same effort and joy here in Spirit of Vengeance.

The more I think about it, this movie would have been a lot better if they used the style of the Crank movies. Just imagine: a Crank movie but with Nic Cage as Ghost Rider as the main character...that sounded like the craziest yet fittest idea ever. But all we got was trash, just poorly managed and directed trash.

The story is very thin, practically the whole plot can be written down in one poster tagline. The size is so little that makes the movie really nothing important. In fact, I tell you this: every time you go into a movie store and you see an empty shelve, IT'S NOT AN EMPTY SHELVE. Why? Because Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance is there. Still don't see it? Well, it is there, but its importance and presence is so little that the eye can't see it, because our brain doesn't care about it and thus, it practically almost doesn't exist. So, remember, everytime there's an empty movie shelve, it's only because there's a Ghost Rider sequel DVD or Blu Ray right there.

Overall, this movie is just as bad as the first one. For everything it improved from the first, it works it out with another mistake of its own. These movies are unimpressive and ridiculous. Simply watch The Avengers or the first Iron Man, and there's your Marvel Comics movie.

Maleficent
Maleficent(2014)
½

Well...it's underwhelming. Very. Malificent is nothing special or new, with no twists or innovations, just an average fairy-tale movie with Angelina Jolie as your Halloween costume this year. Even so, the movie has a lot of not-needed changes on the story and a lot of nonsense all around, but it's not nit-peaking, because the nonsense is right there, on the forth-ground very notable on every scene and every plot. It's just a waste.

So, the stories make no sense, so the movie is playing merely on the safe note, but taking the wrong turn. My expectations where a bit high because I thought this would be a great evil movie, obviously because of Malificent, one of Disney's greatest villains. But instead, it's just a childish take on the villain, turning her into heroine. Just like Sonic says: That's no good. The bad thing is that she "tries" to be evil, but the movie merely depicted her as childish, because instead of doing evil, she mostly does pranks on the fairies and barely does anything despicable. What a downer. The special effects look very artificial, the dragon is not used very good, the action scenes are average and the overall outcome is, well, not good.

Many praises Angelina Jolie as Malificent...well, she did fine, but I wasn't impressed or anything. She's OK, she's a great actress, but I didn't find anything special here. The true love thing to get Aurora out of her curse was changed in the most dreadful and commercial way possible. Instead of being the man who felt in love with her (in like, just one glanced-over scene, classic) it is Malificent who delivers the true love bla bla...yeah, sounds familiar, doesn't it? That's right, ripped off from the money maker Disney movie: Frozen. Wow, they didn't even try. Overall, Malificent it's just an unnecessary and unimpressive movie. You just skip it and watch something else.

Hercules
Hercules(2014)

From a Brett Ratner POV, this film is better than expected. It's not necessarily good, but it is fun. It doesn't take itself seriously, and that adds to the charm. It works with a hundred clichés, but for the better of the entertainment factor. It has Dwayne Johnson, and that is awesome. Brett Ratner is not my favorite at all; he's like a bit more mature version of Michael Bay, as he used to make good films. Hercules is one of his better ones, with all the silliness and fun you'd expect from a Dwayne Johnson movie where he wears loincloth and has the looks of a Jesus Christ.

With Brett Ratner in the director's chair, you already expect a lack of character development and some entertaining but not exhilarating action scenes, and that's what you get here. But there's something else: Dwayne Johnson and entertaining clichés. The Rock delivers as he always do, and has its personal charm all over the dumb picture. The movie part-takes on every cliché imaginable form this swords and sandals movie about a Greek/ Roman mythology, let alone one based on a comic book BASED on Heracles, the Greek divine hero. Yes, this is based on a comic book version of Hercules, so there's a lot to expect on over-the-top-ness.

Hearing Dwayne Johnson screaming all the time is fun, but only because it is. It doesn't get annoying or tired; it's just a riot. The movie works on clichés and silly things, but all comes down to an entertaining experience that is actually a lot of fun, where the badness will only increase your likeness for this movie instead of annoying you as hell like in (ejem) Transformers 4. So, go ahead, have fun with Hercules in this dumb fun fest.

The Expendables 3
½

It is good that Stallone wanted to take The Expendables to a different direction by making the newest film more character driven before going into the all-out action fest. Too bad he couldn't find a way to make it fun. The Expendables 3 isn't necessarily a disappointment; it's most likely following the natural progression of a franchise such as this one (although the last film did raise my expectations a little bit, especially with the cast announced for this one). Of course it was going to suck, but at least we were hoping for a big dumb fun time watching this. It doesn't deliver such.

Let's just say this sequel feels tired: the action isn't as over-the-top as in the previous movies (the previous ones where rated R, whereas this one is a depleted PG-13), it certainly lacks some extravagancy and excitement. This is the cause of two factors: 1. it's following a formula used a million of times, especially this year, and 2. it tries to be more serious, and these two factors divest the fun out of the action scenes. The biggest problem (or should I say, sin) of this movie is being BORING. A film with all these action stars, all these stages for action scenes, all this possible interaction, results boring. How does it do it? Well, let's go slowly and without spoilers.

Like I said before, the movie tries a different direction from the other two by being more in-character, which should work for a film like this; it can add to the story and enrich the experience. The film does this by having a few decent action scenes and some very average shoot and scape scenes, not very exhilarating; but instead offering some drama. And the problem is...that drama is boring. The Barney Ross character isn't the best to hold a drama or a personal weight to his inexistent psyche, and he doesn't get along with the new characters. Without giving anything away, I would just say that the Expendables you want to see are out for the most part and are replaced by newest and youngest people (and their lack of character only adds tons of boredom to the film). Oh, they do comeback, but after a long portion of boredom.

Then we have the final showdown that lasts 30 minutes, I think, and this is where the movie has the big opportunity to redeem itself...but it doesn't, as the action isn't very satisfying. It lacks blood, sure (did I mention this is PG-13?) but it also doesn't feel as fun as it should be. Why? Well, the way I see it, it's because it has a lot of quick cuts and close-ups, resulting in a lack of understanding on what's going on and who is punching or shooting who half of the time. That's not fun. At least we have a Stallone vs Gibson hand-to-hand fight, right? Yes, but it has the same lack of understanding half of the time, and it lasts like 1 minute at most.

Speaking of Gibson, he might be the most interesting villain of the franchise. Not only the character fits the actor, but the dialogue it has isn't as cheesy and predictable as Vilain from Expendables 2 or as forgettable and generic as James Munroe from the first Expendables. It isn't a great villain, but it's the best of the franchise. Even so, it all comes down to his one minute fight with Stallone's character, and that is pretty lame. But how about the newest yet old Expendables like Banderas, Ford and Snipes? Well, they are fine, but Snipes gets moslty forgotten after the first third and Ford just talks, and when he does get into the action, he's only piloting an helicopter and saying one-liners like: "That hurt" and "Good" and "Thank You". Why doesn't he grab a damn gun and starts shooting people? Banderas is actually pretty funny, but most of the times his scenes reach the line between funny and annoying, but never actually crosses it...or does he? You get your own conclusion of this one, but it was fun for me for the most part.

So yes, the problem with Expendables 3 is that it isn't as fun as everyone expects, it's pretty stale. It's just that the other two movies where mostly self-deprecating (specially the second one, which added to its fun) and this one tries to be something else, but fails, and that results in boredom, it failed on its own objective. It's still an escapism for those that want to have some light time on movies, but it isn't a fun light time. This movie is expendable in the worst way possible.

Yes, it's still better than Transformers 4.

The Legend of Hercules

Far more entertaining than what I was expecting, but only because it's bad quality is admirable, dreadfully admirable. This take on Hercules borrows too much and results in nothing; it barely holds itself for an hour and a half, because one minute more and it would be unwatchable.

The movie looks cheap, really REALLY cheap. This is something a YouTube filmmaker would do in special effects. It is understandable, as it's an independent production for a website, and it's only looking for recognition so it can have an opportunity in something and for those standards, it's high. But this is a Hollywood film, so it begs the question why this looks so bad. It's a large combination of bad elements, which all ultimately forms the conclusion that the guys making this doesn't know what they're doing. The film is shot dreadfully, as the shots lack any wonder or Golden Composition. It stablishes nothing. The action scenes have too many quick edits that's hard to tell what just happened half the time. If that wasn't enough, there's a lot of slow-motion & speed up shots that really got tiring even before the film shows them. Also, these guys don't seem to know what lighting is for in films; there's a lot of shots with too much bright and barely have multi-colors on those.

And this film lacks any originality: the story is generic and bland, there are no characters, there's no more story other than a plot, and when it comes to styles, this film steals from many other sword & sandals movies, most notably Stanley Kubrick's Spartacus, William Wyler's Ben-Hur, Zack Snyder's 300 and Ridely Scott's Gladiator, and even the TV Series Spartacus and Vikings. It steals so much it might as well be a compilation of clips from all these movies. Some of the action scenes almost work, but they're shot so dreadfully and deliver so little impact and emotion that they're nothing but a desperate excuse for entertainment when the film has literally nothing to offer. It's a movie that looks bad, sounds bad and IS bad. It's literally nothing but rip-offs of other movies you've seen a million of times. If you thought Disney's Hercules was too much of a change, well, look again!

The Legend of Hercules is pure emptiness and simply nothing to worry about, as surely nobody will remember this after a few days, and it will let itself be forgotten by history. I can't believe I will ever say this, but given the result of this one, I really hope Brett Ratner does better...if a film makes you say that, it means either you or the film reached the rock-bottom.

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles

There's no way a movie with that title can be any good. It can be entertaining, sure, but that doesn't mean it's going to be good. My expectations for this movie where like a Roller Coaster. When the first trailer was released, I was dismayed, because the Turtles looked horrible. Then a more extended trailer came out, and I thought it was OK. It was OK that the Turtles looked ugly; after all, they are mutants. But then you see it's directed by Wrath of the Titans director Jonathan Liebesman and produced (more like co-directed) by Michael Bay, who at this point already made a lot of money with Trans4mers. Anyway, the day has come, and how is this new version of the Turtle phenomenon?

Well, first of all, the movie has bad jokes, bad dialogue and a story that doesn't feel complete. I wonder how many times the Turtles movies will actually focus equally on each turtle instead of trying to focus more on just one. It seems that Hollywood can't get its hands off from Raphael, who in every reboot or remake has to have a plot of his own, which inevitably leads to the rest of the turtles felt without character. So, our childhood icons don't feel like our childhood icons here. Yes, they look ugly, but they're mutants, so it fits. But what did I like about the Turtles here? Well, the fact that each has a different volume and size...I actually liked that. While it doesn't give any character, it's a nice esthetic detail that's good for a change. Also, the motion capture used to create them is really good! I felt that the Turtles where there, even if their lack of character doesn't deliver as well.

And how about Megan Fox? Well, she just plays Megan Fox, that means amateur pornstar acting and lack of charm. The Turtles movies never seems to get April right, it's like a tradition, and this being another Turtles movie, well, it follows such. Is it so hard to get April O' Neal to the screen after they already showed that they can get the Mutant Turtles there? You can't win them all it seems. We also have Will Arnet playing...a character whose name I can't remember (even the movie makes a joke out of that, well done), but he's there. And we also have William Fichtner playing an obvious bad guy. And that's not a Spoiler, that's even in the trailers for the movie, so don't blame me. So as you can see, the cast is nothing really special this time...has it ever been in any Turtles movie? Talking about characters, we have the Splinter, who just looks terrible. And there's Shredder, who in this version looks like the bastard son of the Silver Samurai from the Wolverine and Megatron from Transformers. Yeah, he's there only to kick the Turtles' asses, not so much to actually fight them. Well, the cast is not great, neither the characters they play. We're losing so far.

The only thing left is saying that the action scenes are bad...but they're not. They're actually pretty cool at times. Splinter fights Shredder and it's a pretty cool CGI fight. The Turtles ski a whole snow mountain while fighting the Foot Clan; it gets long and ridiculous, but it's entertaining. And the Turtles fight Shredder once more in a rooftop like in the good old times, and it's average, but fun. Yeah, the action scenes are good, but let's count the good things of this movie: the special effects, the action, the musical score by Brian Tyler (Iron Man 3, Thor the Dark World, the upcoming Avengers: Age of Ultron) and the short runtime. That's four points, resulting in a dreadful 40%. Does that sound satisfying? Let alone the below 20% Rotten Rating given by critics? You say it.

This new version of Ninja Turtles is a bunch of bad jokes, bad characterization, lack of a compelling story and just an empty experience, but fun at least. It's far better than Transformers Age of Extinction, but that's not saying much...well, it is, but doesn't reach the good movie status. If you're a Turtle fan, this will be a mixed bag. Otherwise, if you watched Transformers 4, you can watch anything else without suffering as much.

Guardians of the Galaxy

Just like most of the world, I didn't know a comic like Guardians of the Galaxy ever existed. I never heard a single thing from this concept; it wasn't until I looked up what was next after Captain America: The Winter Soldier. Even after the first trailer was released, I was never that excited about this. I never was that much as I never had a history with these characters. It seems that I have missed a lot, because if the characters from the comic are just as charming and fun to watch as in this movie, then I really have to look up for more Guardians of the Galaxy. This pre-Avengers 2 movie isn't a big epic adventure, or the best that Marvel has come up this year, but it doesn't need to be, as it is fun, exhilarating and full of likeable characters.

The special effects are good, even though it's easy to see when a character becomes a special effect, contrary to most Marvel Movies. The music by Tyler Bates is also good and fitting, and we also have a bunch of famous tracks, most notably Blue Swede's "Hooked on a Feeling" that we all know and remember at this point. But the best detail about this movie is its five main characters: the Guardians themselves. They are such a fun and a pleasure to watch. They all have chemistry, they all have their cool stuff and faults, all of them are properly showed on screen to get more attached to them. Yes, you can get attached to a raccoon in this movie. That joke never gets old...

And much like almost every single Marvel movie ever, the villains are forgettable. The one I remember the most (and it appears only for a few minutes) is Thanos, who in this movie does nothing but sit and talk, and I remember that more than any of the other villains. I don't remember the name of the villains, and they repeated it constantly in the movie. What a failure. Speaking of failures, some of the humor is hit and miss, however only in the first act; the rest actually puts itself together. Another problem was the climax after all the battle...it was a little too cheesy for me. Too much cheese for my burger to eat.

While those problems are huge, they are only a few, as the rest it's good, too much to be missed. Guardians of the Galaxy is another hit by Marvel and it's a good Entremés before the big Age of Ultron in May 2015. Let yourself and your friends to be entertained big time by these great characters.

Resident Evil: Apocalypse
½

The script and lack of characters is obvious (there are characters, but really bad ones) but Apocalypse is another one of those videogame movies that actually adapts the game, and is a bit of entertaiment too. Guilty pleasure.

Resident Evil
½

From the director of Mortal Kombat comes a very toned-down version of the kick-ass game. This takes the game and makes it a really average zombie movie, with no satisfaction or charming whatsoever.

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles III
½

Well, it was true; this movie is "horribufuckus" (five bucks for the one that got the reference). The third Ninja Turtles movie is all-out below average and mediocre, with nothing that made the previous movies enjoyable. I don't think it's even good for children of any age, simply no one should sit through this, not even me, but this is all I do, so my loss is the devil's gain. Time Travel here sounds like a very forced and desperate gimmick to simply make another Ninja Turtles movie and squash every last dollar left for them to collect from innocent fans that were expecting a lot. This is a movie with the Ninja Turtles in the title, but nothing else about what they do best. This is the Turtles going a little full shell here.

The jokes in the previous movies were already pretty hit and miss, but here they're all miss, not a single chuckle anywhere on the hour and a half runtime. The action is pretty absent for a movie with Ninjas and Samurai-ish Asian people (sorry for all the Asians around the world). There's only like 3 action scenes, two of them happening back-to-back on the 30 minute mark and doesn't come back for a third one until the hour and ten minutes, that's 40 minutes of boredom and annoyance, with obnoxious stuff and simple indifference towards everything that happens on that time.

It's a shame to see the Turtles on these new Not-Jim Henson animatronics that are just plain awful. The newest movie made them ugly, but this one made them Chuck E. Cheese's-ish puppets. This Turtles based movie also lacks any notable Turtles villains, mainly because the budget could not generate any of the extravagant villains on the big screen, so they went-off to create two generic, forgettable and boring villains that are nothing but a shitty samurai lord and an annoying British guy on a horse. The perfect duo to go against the Turtles, right?! Not.

Sure the previous movies weren't master pieces, but they were the Ninja Turtles being the Ninja Turtles, whereas here they're nothing but bad practical effects: no character, no charm, nothing that you would expect from them. The Turtles are just a waste in every kind of investment that you can imagine, ¿Where? Only in the awful Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles III. Simply skip this and be in peace.

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles II - The Secret of the Ooze
½

Beyond stupid and ridiculous, but admittedly entertaining and kinda fun, the second Ninja Turtles still hits the hearts of those that grew-up with it. I mean, take four mutated turtles named after the painters of the Renaissance era in a movie where the 90's Vanilla Ice sings and dances along with them. Sold, anyone?

It is a disappointment that the movie has the Turtles using their fists and other objects EXCEPT for their weapons while fighting crime. Because that is what every kid wanted to see...It is also a disappointment that Super Shredder gets easily beaten by himself...no kidding. Surely we all wanted to see Bebop and Rocksteady, but we have some shitty replacement called Tokka and Rahzar...and yes, it's not the same thing, there's a HUGE difference. All this in a silly effort to tone done the violence. I think a movie like this DESERVES such use of violence. The first one did well with all the violence, it would make sense that if they wanted to repeat the success, they would not tone down the violence, but oh man, they did. But even so, the action scenes are still entertaining and fun. Humor gets stupider as it goes and the climax is actually an anti-climax. This is not a good movie, let alone a good sequel, but it's still fun and surely has its nostalgia value to it, and it was because of that that I enjoyed it, but it was beyond stupid.

TMTN II is a guilty pleasure at least, and that's a lot to say when it comes to a movie that doesn't live up to its own title; after all, the secret of the Ooze is never revealed or explained, it's just an excuse for a subtitle. Guess that's why they stopped subtitling the other movies. Overall, an entertaining movie with a huge nostalgic value to it.

Lincoln
Lincoln(2012)
½

Spielberg is a wreck. He always makes all these cheerful and upbeat films. Most of the time it works, few times it doesn't. But could you imagine him doing a story about Abraham Lincoln, the best president ever? Probably it would be like a fairy tale treatment, with many cheesy details and all that...but no, this time, Spielberg changes upbeat for political seriousness and depth character analysis on Lincoln, and the result is great.

Much like many other people, I found Daniel Day-Lewis taking every scene where he's in as his own. He owns this movie each time he plays Lincoln, he kills it. He's just great; I truly see an image of the United States President on him. I like how he often re-acts the poster, with his head down most of the times, enabling you to see the grandeur of this historical character and all he has been and has to go through. But Lewis is not alone; we also have Sally Field as Lincoln's wife and mother of his children, with Tommy Lee Jones as Thaddeus Stevens and even the younger yet talented Joseph Gordon-Levitt, and a handful of other great performances to assemble a great cast for a great film.

John Williams does the music once more, and he delivers exactly what he needs, even though, this isn't his best in years. There's also all these political talks that sometimes bores me. Politics is not my thing, and I don't wish it to be any day. However, then how did I like Lincoln? Well, it's not only about politics, but about character, characters and the drama they create around them that engages everyone. It's all about seeing the best and worst of Lincoln and of his actions, and how slavery was emancipated because of him. The movie does feel long, it's merely two and a half hours of runtime. But, each of those are worth it. Lincoln is another great Spielberg film that will become a classic in years to come as a great representation of one of the highest historical figures of America. A great political-drama epic.

Argo
Argo(2012)

Yeah, it glorifies the CIA's role in the mission, but that doesn't make it any less enjoyable. The tagline of this movie kinda fits about the real story and this movie: "The movie was fake. The mission was real." Yeah, it was, and it doesn't matter how it was depicted as long as it tells what happened. I get it, the Iranians didn't chase them while the plane was taking-off...and the Canadians did much more...and the other countries didn't reject them...yeah, but the movie is still awesome. Not because it glorifies America, but because it is a good movie. Not an accurate story, but a good movie, a great one actually.

Argo has great writing that develops human characters that we can care for. They show feelings and they interact. Humans, Iranians, Canadians, Americans, all are great characters nevertheless. The story is well-told in the storytelling department. It has a three act structure, it closes everything it started and has an adequate runtime: just one hour and some minutes...what? It lasts 2 hours? It was so good that it felt short for its own size.

The performances are great, each character being believable and identifiable. We have Ben Affleck, Brian Cranston, John Goodman, and many other great performances. The music by Desplat fits the tone of each scene, and helps building the tension and thrills that caused us so much attachment to this movie. Even if the story is not entirely accurate, it's still engrossing. It has been a long time since I felt this way watching a movie. I felt this had a Dark Knight-ish feeling towards it; this is what I feel each time a movie engrosses me in every minute of it. Each of the two hours of this movie where good and I really enjoyed the movie. Even with its accuracy issues, Argo is still a good movie, while not a remarkable re-telling of a real mission. This is a great movie and I really recommend it to everyone who has not watch it. You'll be grateful. It did everything it had to do and I liked it. Loved it, actually.

Big Fish
Big Fish(2003)

Tim Burton often comes with a strange pattern. Since the 2000's started, he makes a bad movie, then a good one, then a bad one, then a good one, and so forth. This came after his version of Planet of the Apes, and fits the pattern accurately, as Big Fish was his next film, and is a good one; not only that, but a charming and heart-warming one. Big Fish is that story that's bigger than life and goes to where no story has gone before. Well, it has, but this movie gives its own charm to it.

I'm a fan of visuals, and Tim Burton always offers some rich visuals in each of his movies. Big Fish has an imaginary-fantasy-ish visual style for Big Fish, which fits to the tone of the story. It's cheesy, but likeable. It's upbeat and hopeful, but has its dark moments too. It's not as "gothic" as Burton films get, but it doesn't need to be. This is a charming tale that requires colors and light, almost like a Disney film.

Big Fish starts as a Forrest Gump-ish kind of story, but makes its own identity as it goes, as it uses imaginary details included by the character Ed Bloom. For what I got, it's about glorifying stories to make them legends, and thus, to transcend time and be timeless. It's a good lesson for the imaginary people and for those that can tell good stories. For others, this can be just a charming film about a man whose life was abnormal, but made it interesting because of his fantasy additions, resulting in tales more than actual stories. It's still good in that way.

Big Fish is another one of the good Tim Burton films, which easily re-forms him as a good director that often misses as much as he hits the spot. He can still make good films, and this is one of them. Give it a chance if you got time, you won't regret it.

Hot Fuzz
Hot Fuzz(2007)
½

"Morning".

That was awesome, not only the line, but the film itself. Hot Fuzz is the second Wright-Pegg collaboration, the second film in the Three Flavours Cornetto Trilogy. And much like in Shaun of the Dead, the work presented is excellent, not only that, but one of the best comedies ever made in history. Actually, it won't be a surprise if some years later it enters in the National Film Registry list of culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant films. Hot Fuzz is a great parody of the action films, taking every cliché but in the correct way, and ultimately becomes a parody of itself, which in this case, is part of the joke. Genius!

Being a British comedy, it's not only smart, but also fast-paced, fun and with a lot of little details that you might miss, but that's more than a reason to come back and enjoy the film once more. There's a bunch of cameo appearances, like Peter Jackson and...Well, you figure out the rest. Also, the story completes itself by correctly and smartly connecting and re-connecting all of what it tells, leaving no loose ends practically, which, for a comedy, is a lot of effort. Some guy named Adam Sandler should take some notes for advice...

If there's something I didn't like was that the film had a perfect pace until that scene at the end where the whole station blows up because of the underwater-mine. What was that all about? It felt rushed and forced just to tie loose ends. I know I said that's what the film does, but here it was sporadic and all of the sudden, almost without rhyme or reason. While that affected, Hot Fuzz was still excellent work of comedy and action.

Edgar Wright delivers an actually great comedy, one of the best I've seen for all times. It's a film that knows what it has to do and excels and exceeds on everything, resulting in a highly satisfactory film which I can comeback over and over again to enjoy it each time. The best of the Cornetto trilogy is here.

Planes
Planes(2013)

Pretty much Cars all over again, using every single cliché in the book, except with planes now. Sounds like money! I mean, idea! Planes is one of those Disney films with the quality of a direct-to-video story, except that this was theatrically released, because...they have to fill-up the schedule along with Frozen for the year, I guess. While it was not a total loss, it wasn't that much of a gain either.

Being a direct-to-video quality movie from Disney, it's not as terrible as, say, Cinderella II or The Beauty and the Beast: The Enchanted Christmas; hell, it's a lot better than Cars 2, A PIXAR FILM! Also, this isn't necessarily a Disney-Disney film, but a Disneytoons film. What do they do? The freakin' direct-to-video sequels! Now it's not a surprise, eh? Well, now with that out of the way, let's dig in more:

The animation and visuals are great, Oscar-worthy (the only award worthy aspect nevertheless) as it can be expected, and the music (the score, not the featured songs) is also great, delivering an ambience and fitting with the visuals. And the rest is pure crap. Characters are not charming; Dusty is the classic underdog with nothing new, except that...he's a plane. The story is ALSO the underdog classic, or in this case, tired clichéd underdog story, the difference being that...it's with planes. And the jokes...planes. Just kidding, they're just as unfunny as my latter joke: not funny at all and there's a lot of insufferable puns...yes, with planes' stuff. A Plane package is a plane's butt...man, the joke dies long before getting done, and it happens every time a pun is set.

Much like the world of Cars (which properly, but dreadfully, is the same as Planes), it has a lot of non-sense about the mechanics of it. Little bird planes? Why not simply real birds? How does the planet here keeps itself alive without a proper biodiversity? I know it's an animated film, but it still has to work some sense out of it in order to not get distracted from the story. The bad thing is, the story is so cliché, tired and predictable that you just get caught-up in a dead-end, with no reliable side to be comfortable. Then again, I'm kinda of a sucker for visuals, so if I had to come back to watch this thing, it would be only for the visuals, and if I have to entertain some annoying kids, but that's it.

Planes is neither a Disney nor a Pixar film, it's a Dinseytoon film. Much like any other direct-to-video film, kept in mind this in order to withstand its below-the-expectations quality to at least not suffer completely. It's like any other Disneytoon project...except with planes.

Ben-Hur: A Tale of the Christ
½

Making a film like Ben-Hur in 1959 was truly revolutionary, ambitious and epic. But can you imagine something like that in the 20's? Back then, the media was only starting to exploit the possibilities, and it met a huge upgrade when The Birth of a Nation came in 1915 as the first epic film. 10 years later, Ben-Hur: A Tale of the Christ came to perfect it.

It's most likely that you watched the 1959 remake. In that case, imagine something just as epic but in black and white and silent. It is possible. This version has some differences with the remake (and we are not talking about the runtime, with the 1959 version being over and hour longer), and it results in characters and story events happening and or acting in different ways, but ultimately resulting equally magnificent. The scope is huge, the action scenes are superb, especially for a film this old, and the overall emotions are well delivered. Yet some of the changes I like them better in the 1959 version, as it leaves on a more powerful note. The subtitle of "A Tale of the Christ" however makes more sense here than in the remake. Jesus appears a bit more often (and with his face off-screen too) and in a much more subtle way than the remake. In the remake you see at least his back, while here you barely see his hand. Nevertheless, it goes a bit too far in suddenly accomplishing miracles while being in the way to the Calvary. It was managed better in the remake, as Jesus also affects Ben-Hur big time after the chariot race, while in this silent version they seem to have lost connection after the water scene. But still, the rest of Ben-Hur is just the magnificent piece you expect.

This and its 1959 remake entered the National Film Registry for preservation, and it shows. While Ben-Hur of 1959 is the perfection, this silent version is what established its greatness. A great example of early cinema.

Godzilla, King of the Monsters!
½

The 1956 American version is exactly what you think: Unnecessarily changed. Instead of simply dubbing the damn thing, our dear manipulator America adds an American actor as the main human character and tosses all Japanese stuff as the supporting cast. Well, it sounds bad, but it isn't for the most part. King of the Monsters still presents the wonder of Godzilla and his power, and that established him for the American audience, and much like Japan in 1954, since then it had never leaved us.

The film suffers from a mix between narration and all-out exposition, and even narrating things that are obviously happening on-screen, most of this happens in the famous Godzilla attack on Tokyo. Being an Americanization, the film also has some hilarious editing and some crappy over-dubbing. Many of the shots featuring Raymond Burr try to stick with the rest of the Japanese shots, but clearly there's a lot of difference between both, both in audio and image quality. Some actors replace the Japanese crew, but of course, we never see their faces talking to Burr, that only happens by cutting to a Japanese angle. It's hilarious, and that somehow adds a LOL factor to this version of the film. It makes it funnier, but not better than the Japanese original.

Those are very few details, but the Americanization alone depletes the original characters of some of their emotional power, which they had in the original and worked on the third act. It still has the spirit of the original, however weaker. It's one version most of the Americans remember, and it has a nostalgic value, but also since then, they have learned to appreciate the Japanese better with all reason. It doesn't hurt to check this American version, especially if you loved the Japanese original, it ultimately causes a bit of laughter and no hate, and for an Americanized version of a foreign film, that's hard to achieve. Both versions are a worth watch overall, so we all end up winning. Let it pass.

Dawn Of The Planet Of The Apes
½

Did Transformers destroy your hope for cinematic future? With this new Apes movie, you don't have to worry, as it shows the cinema is far from a certain death, and it's only because of this new movie. 2014 has so far been a good year in movies. We've had some good new entries and some good sequels here and there (Snowpiercer, Edge of Tomorrow, The LEGO Movie, Captain America 2, X-Men Days of Future Past and so forth). Sure, we've also had some garbage (the new Transformers, Legend of Hercules, Pompeii, Blended, and so forth), but overall, the good movies are getting too good that it overcomes any bad of the bad movie experiences. Dawn of the Planet of the Apes is one of those current year's best movies. It's one of those darker and bigger sequels that works hugely and expands the Apes' new universe started by Rise.

First of all, this was the movie I was most worried for. Rise was so good that I got really nervous about the sequel, thinking the standard set by the first was too difficult to reach and even more to exceed. Also, the saga has been not that present in all its own history. The first five movies were released between 1968 and 1973, then we didn't have any other Apes movie until 2001 with Tim Burton's terrible re-imagining that almost immediately de-booted the franchise. That was another 10 years of sleep for the franchise until it returned fresh and re-rebooted with Rise of the Planet of the Apes, which was finally a great Apes movie that used the saga's mythology as a basis and more realism and seriousness as the boost. It worked, but we still had to wait 4 years, 4 YEARS to get a sequel; the least I could expect was that the movie had to be pretty damn good for taking so long to get done. And it certainly was, as the wait was worth it.

Dawn goes everywhere I wanted the sequel to go: forward, showing more emotions such as nostalgia, choosing sides, learning to share, to comprehend, to be lead, to have a dilemma, etc. It shows conflicts, it shows loyalty, the price of freedom and that of being caged too. It also shows more action, more violence, but all connecting to the story and characters, never as an excuse for entertainment. The story also has two phases: that of haunting (thanks to the proper atmosphere given to the movie) and later of suspense, as by that time the movie already engage you to its characters, specially Caesar, played again in motion capture by Andy Serkis, who once again does an amazing job, and the movie gives a lot of Caesar to enjoy and to hold up until the next sequel in 2016. I can even go as far as to say that the character itself makes the whole movie alone.

Other aspects of the movie are also pretty damn good. The music by Michael Giacchino reminds me that of Jerry Goldsmith's score of the first movie, close enough to remind you of that and not enough to feel it's trying to carbon-copying it; a perfect musical balance. The special effects are a lot better two. Rise was also good in this element, but this sequel makes the apes from the previous movie look like a Pixar movie. All the apes feel like a part of the world and you feel their presence, and they interact well with everything surrounding them. The story, well, if it was bad, I wouldn't have loved it at all. It's perfectly told and tells exactly what I wanted it to tell as a sequel: it ups everything; it makes it bigger and covers new grounds. These kind of movies often have the classic and even clichéd: "Human is Satan" thing, where it shows the evil of mankind and ultimately you beg for other species. It happens in movies like Ferngully (I can't believe I'm mentioning that) and also James Cameron's Avatar. But Dawn does a twist on this, in which both the humankind and the apes are actually very similar, both being just as good and as evil as they can get, and that is one of the main subjects of the movie, and much like everything else, it's well managed through the movie's two hours and ten minutes of runtime.

Each side of the movie has similar elements: both have a character that wants everything done the right way and live in peace, each have a hot-head character that causes the conflict, each have its own goodies and baddies, but ultimately the apes are far more charismatic, mostly because not only is Caesar's character a really good one (with touching sides as him trying to bond with his older son, him being a leader, him having to trust the humans, him trying to maintain the balance, etc.), but also because the human characters are mostly one-dimensional...two-dimensional at least. The main human character is stale, mostly generic, but ultimately a noble one, but so are his "family"; his kid and his girlfriend. Gary Oldman is good, but his character is barely two-dimensional; it would be one-dimensional if it wasn't for one scene where he shows more deep emotions, but nothing more. Overall, all the human characters are simple and nothing very special. But at the same time, that's kinda what I expect in each Planet of the Apes save for the first one back in 1968. Also, that's kinda what I wanted, because the Apes character that way can be the center of the movie, and here, they are the best of the best.

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes is another great movie from this year, and easily ranks among the best of the year and among the best sequels ever. It goes bigger and better, and leaves on a big note that makes you hope for the next one that's only two years ahead this time. These Apes movies are getting better, and so far I can only hope for the third one to be great. One of the best movies of 2014 by far.

Final Destination
½

That premise...it seems like the ideal plot for a great horror film. With such premise, you can create suspense, thrill, chills, fear and even some drama, and then have some creative deaths. I'll admit it, the film did have some atmosphere of fear and despair, but overall, it's just an averagely executed idea that doesn't scare and doesn't create any drama. It falls into the same clichés that every horror movie with teenager characters falls into: the characters are stale and dumb, like, just because they are underage. It doesn't help that the acting is very average too.

We have each of these generic characters: the main character that wants to do everything right, the douchebag, the hot girl, the bully, the dumb, etc. Nothing new here. The story had an interesting development, but that alone needs characters to fully exploit its elements. Seeing how bad these characters are, you can easily guess the result. It gets a bit silly at times and predictable: they're all gonna die, so every scene in which they save one another are pointless. Now, the highlight: the death scenes.

Yeah, some of them are creative, gory, and even cool. But that's the problem: they're not scary. They're just...gory, graphical, but nothing really compelling. Also it transforms everyday stuff into a deadly trap, and it isn't scary, it's silly. I did felt anxious while the movie showed the build-up to the death of certain characters, but after the fun moment of watching them die, it feels empty. And I don't even know if I were supposed to feel anxious or it's because the movie is annoying; something tells me it's the second one, but then again, maybe the movie did have something in there. Some of its moments work, but overall, it's not what it could have been. It should've been a horror classic, but it's only the beginning of a dreadful saga that overstayed its welcome at the very first sequel.

Overall, it's just dumb fun, but it shouldn't be; it should be scary and suspenseful. Guess it didn't work. Well, it won some good money, so I guess people really liked this stuff. Well, unfortunately that meant a lot of sequels, each of them worse...ish. It never needed a sequel; it never needed to have numbers in the box-office either. Guess the death sentence was for us.

Insomnia
Insomnia(2002)

The only film that Nolan has directed without having written it too. And maybe that is why this is one of his less-talked about films. Nevertheless, his direction it's still edgy, complex and competent, just like any of his other films. After Doodlebug, Following and Memento (his previous films) I was glad and even relieved that this film didn't use paradoxes or a fragmented narrative, mostly just a three act structure following a linear story-telling. Seeing how good it is, it means Chris Nolan can do any kind of narrative, and he will do it right, no questions asked. No doubt why he is my favorite director.

Insomnia is a psychological drama with taste. The Alaskan environment, the film's mood and characters gives the movie a tone that I felt was not only accurate to this kind of story, but was also constant. It never felt like a regular crime movie, it has its touch. It plays with examination, with psychology, with character. The main character lives a personal dilemma that causes him, well, what the title of the movie says. We get to see a bit of how he thinks, and all is strengthened by Al Pacino's solid performance. It was so good that I totally forget he once played Tony Montana. You watch both movies and you could swear both are different actors that only look the same; you'll somehow be convinced that it can't be the exact same person. Well, more if you're dumbass, but you know what I mean, it's only a feeling, not a fact. We also have Robin Williams (who doesn't appear until an hour in) and Hillary Swank, whose character doesn't die this time. Wow, that's a new one. So with those three, you can already expect verisimilitude in this story, and you'll get one.

I can understand why this is an often overlooked Nolan film, specially seeing what his next film to this is (the amazing and kinda revolutionary Batman Begins), but even so, this is another great work from him. This also shows he can pull-off a story he had not write, and still do it right. A nice, even great psychological drama with great performances.

Memento
Memento(2000)

Christopher Nolan did very well with his short film Doodlebug, and did even better with The Following, but Memento marks his true breakthrough and also marks his edgy skill in films about narrative and complexity, and with mind. At this point, more than decade later, it's no surprise the film's fractured narrative, which goes both backwards and straight, resulting in a story that resolves on the very middle of it all, but for us, it's the very end after a long journey. It also features some actual actors and actresses, like Guy Pierce (whom in years later would piss me off in Iron Man 3) and Carrie-Anne Moss (who actual shows emotions here unlike her Trinity character in The Matrix trilogy).

As it can be expected with a Nolan film (back there being a surprise), the film is mind-blowing, brilliant, constantly thrilling, self-fulfilling, smart, entertaining and dark, not because it's a mad world, but because it feels realistic. Dark is not how much you tone down the colors, is in how smart it is, and thus, how realistic it is. As for what I heard, the film is mostly accurate in showing the experience of having anterograde amnesia, which forms part of the film's fractured narrative. The story is told in a very challenging way, in which you need to take these fragments and put them together by yourself while watching a new part of the story that chronologically already happened, but you didn't know. It's hard, but that makes it great. It's genius. Sure it's not the first film that does this, but it is one done with effort and skill.

The sole fact of the fractured narrative gives this movie a twist on how you normally watch a film. It goes away from the three act structure and goes for having the first act as the finale. On the way, seeing all that happens (and that the characters forgets, unfortunately for him) gives a certain complexity, very Nolan-ish. Even the poster itself has the Droste effect, which consist of a picture appearing within itself. Perfect depiction of the movie. Memento is widely regarded as one of the best films in the 2000-2010 decade, and I can see why. People still talk about this film, and surely will do for many other years. Nolan, you didn't disappoint, because as always, you exceeded my expectations.

Noah
Noah(2014)
½

When you see giant rock beasts (fallen angels) in a Biblical-ish film, that's the time to change your mind set to "it's a Hollywoody adaptation". Which means it is going to be more fantasy-ish and almost un-respectful to what it's taking basis on, in this case, Noah's Ark, a famous biblical event.

So yeah, this is very different from the event, but if they're making it a movie, don't you wish it feels like one? I have seen other adaptations on Noah's Ark, and most of them sucks because they do nothing with the material or it gets boring watching people suffering in an Ark for months. Darren Aronofsky turns the event into a spectacular epic that leaves the plot of faith in favor of a more humanist point of view. That's good, but it isn't part of the message. The message is clear, yes, but it seems the movie doesn't know anymore. The best word I can describe this film is "unbalanced".

It has many good elements, but none of them feel a 100% compelling. There are some things in the story that happen without reason and without rhyme. Or is it backwards? The movie doesn't know either. Noah's transformation into a psychopath is not welcome, not only because it is out of the biblical figure, but also because it feels out of character, the one portrayed in the movie at least. Sometimes the movie doesn't give enough time for characters or situations to act, and end up feeling like loose ends. It doesn't help that some characters end up being what everyone know they will be. Ham is the classic jack-ass that doesn't know shit, it's almost like a biblical Anakin from the Star Wars prequel trilogy. You know Noah isn't going to kill Ila's twins. You know the bad guy (Tubal-cain) is going to die. It has many predictable things, and they do bother because you know what's going to happen exactly, so you're asking a lot of times for the story to get there faster. The film also feels the necessity of having spectacle, but in Hollywood fashion. I mean, things like flashy rock fallen angels fighting an army of men trying to get to the Ark with some pretty visuals, and so forth; it's not entirely necessary. However...it is pretty spectacular.

The battle for the Ark is pretty fun, even if it feel out of tone with, well, everything the story of Noah's Ark is about. It all results into an entertaining and emotionally effective epic that will entertain you more than it will raise your faith. It has great performances, great special effects, great cinematography and some spectacular scenes. Another epic that everyone can enjoy.

Ben-Hur
Ben-Hur(1959)

Ben-Hur was my most long-awaited epic to watch, as I never got a chance to see it. I could say I never heard of this film until 2006, when they talked about movies that won many Academy Awards, let alone 11. Ben-Hur, Titanic and Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King are the only films in history to won the 11 Academy Awards for which they were nomiated (except for Ben-Hur, that was nominated for 12), and all of them enter in the "epic" category of films. And how could they not, when they represent the power of movies (except for Titanic, maybe...)

Ben-Hur was no dissapointment. I got my hands on the 50th anniversary edition (that's 80% books and pictures and 20% the actual movie) and I can safely say that the money was worth it. It's a grand epic full of grandeur, spectacle and heart, with great performances, great shots, memorable scenes, grand musical score, impressive scope and a take on the Tale of the Christ. I couldn't stay calmed during the sea ships fight and the famous and classic chariot race scenes, or the effectively emotional scenes involving the Christ or the tasteful drama of the main character itself, Judah Ben-Hur. It's one of those movies you can't miss; there's too much to experience here.

Charlton Heston is always a charm (especially for me since I watched him on Planet of the Apes, you MANIACS!) and we have other great actors and actrecess...that I haven't see in another film...wow. However they portray unforgettable characters. The sets and locations gives the movie a huge scope, with a super widescreen camera that captures everything you want to see and everything that can make the shot incredible, like capturing 10'000 extras watching the charriot race or watching the centinel coming back triumphant. The film itself lets you know you're watching something big. The direction is superb, by the hand of William Wyler (who also won an Oscar for this movie, no surprise) that knows when is the moment to tell the story and when to let the spectacle to show, creating a perfect balance...well, not much.

My only downside has something to do with that, if not all of it. I thought some scenes lasted way too long, like Esther finding out that both Judah's mother and sister has leprosy; some of the talk there had too many silent pauses that lasted a bit, resulting in the scene feeling 10 minutes longer when it's actually just 5. I know that ups the drama, but you can make it faster and surely, without having long pauses between them. The movie is 3 hours and 42 minutes longer, but if we could up the pace on some talk scenes, it would last 3 hours and 10 minutes. But the rest of Ben-Hur it's just incredible, not only that, but epically incredible.

My favorite scenes are the Battle of the Flagship and the Pirates, The Chariot Race scene (obviously) and the scene of Jesus' way to the calvary and his crucifixion and death, leading to the film's powerfully emotional climax. Specially the Chariot Race, which even today is one of the greatest scenes ever put on film. How spectacular and extreme is that scene, let alone for 1959. The set is huge, and I mean HUGE. Those are 9 minutes of awesomeness all around. Everything is perfectly shot and edited, lasting the enough to get a 100% satisfaction. There's nothing in the world of cinema like the Chariot Race.

Ben-Hur is truly a big grand epic that has aged well. The magic still works today, and in some ways, better than when it came out. It does deserve the 11 Oscars it won and all the reputation it has earned. One of the greatest films in history.

Citizen Kane
Citizen Kane(1941)

It seems hard to call this movie in any other way than "the greatest film ever made". Well, it certainly changed the media forever with its cinematography and form of storytelling, along with its 100% fitting music, it's character analysis (something new back then; we can say this movie started the wide character development that movies require since) and its still impressive focus on each shot that delivers a clear view of each plain. It is a great movie, but personally, I don't think it's the best of the best. It is inventive and great, awesome, but if I didn't felt it was the best I've seen, I can't call the movie in such way. Still, based on my experience, it is one of the greatest.

As I said, it's like if I don't call this the best movie ever, then everybody would call me a tasteless bastard that knows nothing about movies. But the term "best movie of all time" is debatable. Many also call The Godfather the greatest movie, also The Wizard of Oz, Casablanca, etc. But Kane seems to be the most constant on the best lists as No.1; including it on a personal Top 10 list itself is kinda clichéd nowadays. Nevertheless, while not the best movie ever made, it is one of the hardest films to hate, it's almost impossible. Sure, if you're between 8-17 years old, you won't get this film at all and hate it, or at least that's what you think. When you are more into characters than entertainment, Citizen Kane grabs you from the beginning, as you also want to know what "Rosebud" means.

Now, let's get to the movie itself: The way the story is told, the way it was shot, the way ot was acted, the way it was presented; all of that was new back then and changed everything for movies. From that moment on, this became the prime example of how to make a movie. Each shot of the movie is so clear and has such an atmosphere...that delivers such a viewing experience unlike any other. How it uses many plains to show you all with the same clarity and focus was the perfect visual for movies since. The character analysis itself was new for that time, but even here is executed in a unique way. Each is a bit of story from the Kane character's life as told by people that knew him, that shared with him, that loved him, that hated him, thus actually sharing a true analysis by these people. Hell, probably the Kane we saw in the film was not entirely the real one, as it could be an interpretation of the person talking about him! It's too much deep for a 1941 movie, but that's the magnificence of the movie: it delivers everything and then some. Only masterpieces can do that: grow a profound analysis after the very first view of only its best details. Because when you think about it, ¿How did anyone know that Kane's last word was Rosebud when nobody was with him when he died? Even Orson Welles was like "Do never talk about that" when his friends in production talk him to it.

Don't think the analysis is that great? It is, even for today's standards: We see his rise, fall, and many other aspects of his life, and we do get emotional connections, thus feeling what Kane feels and that way, we live with him. Seeing him happy makes you happy because you understand why, and the same goes for every emotion he delivers, all with the superb acting of Orson Welles. With that reviewed, now to other details. The little details make a movie loveable, and how would a film like Citizen Kane not have these?

We have details such as the shadows, the fact that you never see the reporter's face, the way there's always someone in the forthground, in the middle ground and in the backgroung, the way it transcends from one shot to another during the flashbacks, etc. All these are highly noticeable and gives the movie, like any other movie, its own charm. A supreme film by any means, Citizen Kane, while not the best film ever, IS the best example of filmmaking, as it does everything right in all its elements: the writing, the acting, the cinematography, the music, everything. So good, so great, it still holds up today, and will hold up as long as the eternity is...eternal.

Barry Lyndon
Barry Lyndon(1975)

Stanley Kubrick is the master on slow films. He somehow makes slowness huge fun and admirably artsy. Also, his long tracking shots, calmed zoom-outs, large cinematography and telescopic wide angles are also part of his awesome slowness. Barry Lyndon is a great story, adapted from a novel by a great writer, produced by a great producer and directed by a great director; all of them are the one and only Stanley Kubrick, and this film is one of his more beautiful ones.

While the narrator can mostly be taken as "Exposition Man", the story still manages to be told well and with a pacing that it's both slow and normal on speed. Fast, it isn't, but that isn't a bad thing. Something I love from somewhat slow films is that they let you to breath into the world or the time period the film is, that way, you get more into the characters because you feel their world or time period. This is something very few films manage to do: Alien, 2001: A Space Odyssey (another great Kubrick film), The first Hobbit movie by Peter Jackson; all these know how to tell a story and stop for some periods of time to let you live their world. Barry Lyndon is another great example of such slow story-telling.

When talking about Stanley Kubrick, it's impossible not to mention his filmmaking techniques, and each of his movies uses the same ones, but in a different way; kinda like uploading the same photo over and over, but using a different Instagram filter on each upload. In Barry Lyndon, Kubrick filmed this in such a way that each shot is like a living painting from the 17th century. This is ingeniously made by the use of natural lightning and no electric lights at all. There are scenes with candles lights being the only source of lightning on the shot, making the film much more in tone with the historical period it's presenting. With Barry Lyndon, Kubrick created another innovating cinematography method that also serves as a form of story-telling for the film, something I can't recall seeing in another film.

This is why Kubrick was the master: he was inventive and new, and because of it, his films were never as great on their time, making Kubrick a genius ahead of his own time. Kubrick, I hope you are resting well in the eternity, as now you are one of the greatest directors of all time. Barry Lyndon is such a beautiful film...there are few words I can use to talk about it. When you see it, its greatness speaks for itself on each shot, on each part of the story, on each change of scenario. Another great example of cinematic greatness from Stanley Kubrick, one of my favorite directors of all time.

Transformers: Age of Extinction

Even if you give up your senses at this point, it is impossible not to be affected by this movie at any moment. One thing is acknowledging how bad it is going to be, and another is experiencing such badness; the latter one is always worse. Age of Extinction is yet another rewind from Michael Bay featuring all the robo-action and explosions, but this time I think it got even worse. The story is stupid; I mean, really? The Transformers are suddenly hated now? Why does the government need to capture them just so they can make their own? Why do they all wear black and act like assholes? Why do all of them drive black cars? How is this movie even stupider than Revenge of the Fallen? One question is way more effort than any of what Michael Bay puts in this.

The action is good, as always, but the fun factor seems to be lacking a lot of times. In all the previous movies at least the action seemed legit to happen; there was a lot of bullshit talk and we wanted explosions. Sure, they overstayed their welcome too, but at least it had a reason to had action. Here, the action connects to nothing. There's one scene where the humans drive a ship across Chicago and try to escape the Lockdown minions. At that point, you already ask: "Where's the story? ¿Why is this scene happening?" Another scene has Stanley Tucci's character going on an elevator and goes on for like 6 minutes and has his female Asian assistant fighting and then the guy in the elevator with Tucci also fights, and then he goes up into I don't know what because it has nothing to do with anything! The movie has his cool awesome moments, but each time after going through painful clapboard poster dialogue and a lot of other painful clichés. Here, there is nothing new for anyone to see, even talking about the Dinobots. They are awesome, but only in the few minutes they appear. I couldn't help but merely hate this movie even more than Revenge of the Fallen. If you're an 8 to 17 year old human being, then you will surely like this, it was made for you. But if you're a true grown up adult, then I advise you to stay out of this movie because you will suffer for being smarter than this movie; And for watching other people becoming dumbshits liking this.

Something I have to say about this movie is that I was kinda relieved to see humans getting a piece of the action doing something, even fighting robots; but still, all the characters are awful and the exact same you expect: the main human character is one you have seen a million times, just added the charm of Wahlberg; the chick is another dumb Megan Fox rip-off acting like a whore and bla bla bla; everyone in this movie are morons. This is by far the worst from Transformers in my sight; I couldn't help it. It's just too much for me, and the worst thing is that there is going to be a Transformers 5 in 2016! The suffer goes on and on. If you're looking for some entertainment, then this is probably your time killer, but even so, you'll still suffer.

Is this destroying cinema? Well, no. In this year, we had The Lego Movie, X-Men Days of Future Past, Captain America 2, How to Train Your Dragon 2, etc. This is only another bug in the windshield of great cinema that can be easily cleaned up. That at least gives me hope for the future of filmmaking; there are still a lot of movies that put effort in everything they do, and those are the ones that will be loved and re-watched. The Age of Extinction for the Transformers franchise should be this 2014 year.

Following
Following(1999)
½

After Doodlebug, it is good to know that Nolan quickly moved and evolved in filmmaking, once again taking creative control all by himself (the budget of this movie was only 6,000 dollars, all out of his salary) and showing all of what you would expect from him: complex yet understandable and great. Following is only one of his first big steps to his own grandeur. Let's get this clear at once: The climax is smart, but not up to the level of excitement you might expect. Other than that, this film by Christopher Nolan takes you back to watching Hitchcock films with intriguing premise and the cleverness you expect from such director.

The actors are OK, but giving this film's persistence on low budget stuff, it's neither a huge surprise nor a huge disappointment. How the story ensembles itself it's quite admirable and even entertaining, and at the end, you can't help but feel a huge satisfaction. It can get confusing at times, but if you watched Memento or Fight Club, this shouldn't be as hard to follow; after all, it gets clear as it progresses.

Following is another master work from Nolan and shows his early yet effective works foreshadowing his current status as one of the greatest directors of our time, and yet to come, of all times. If you miss the Hitchcock films, take this as a Hitchcock-ish kind of film.

Doodlebug
Doodlebug(1997)

Simple and un-original, but still highly watchable and interesting, Christopher Nolan's first work of art is nice and uses the Kafkaesque paradox to offer a lot of internal psychodelia in only 3 minutes. A great start for one of my favorite directors.

Sideways
Sideways(2004)
½

Really Rotten Tomatoes? All you have to say is "An emotional and heartfelt comedy."? I expected more professionalism from all of you. That out of the way, Sideways is indeed an emotional and heartfelt comedy...OK, but it has many other things too, so let's write about them.

First of all, I liked both Giamatti and Church, they have such characters that complete each other. They go through many things in their 7 day trip, and they are so believable and real, that everytime something happens to any of them, we feel it, every tear, every smile, every comedic stuff, everything. Verisimilitude is the correct word to talk about them. They also go through many negative moments too, but those also give the happier moments more strength and power, and also help the comedy to work. It could have gone the easy way putting a lot of slapstick and sex jokes, but they knew what they had in their hands, and they made the best out of it. The sex jokes are genuine and uncomfortable when they are supposed to be, I mean, even the characters in the movie know when it's uncomfortable. Instead of slapstick we get pretty much something closer to real life: just one little crazy thing here, one little discussion here, all keeping the tone through the movie's two hour and seven minute runtime. All these elements hold the movie together and it's just enough to make it an unforgettable experience.

I can hardly think of any problems I had with this movie, so I'll just leave it on "It's a great movie". It is, it's watchable, funny, intelligent and realistic. All the likeable elements and all the joy a movie should have. If you haven't watch it, do it the very first chance you have.

Fight Club
Fight Club(1999)

What a crazy film. Indeed this is the kind of reason why I love movies. They can be impeccable experiences and deliver something that will always be on your mind until the moment you die. Fight Club is a film with lots of questions and WTF moments that ultimately result in something completely different. Not an answer, not a conclusion, but something, something else.

It's hard to talk about this film without giving any spoilers, so I'll do my best. I love this film for its style. It's weird, but normal; it's hateful, but loveable; it's strange, but common. Whatever it is, maybe it's all of that and none. Don't get it? Me neither, but I can assure you I love this. I love the humor, I love the subliminal images, I love how they keep distracting you until reaching the big reveal, I love how symbolic it is on how the thing you own end up owing you. I love this film full of psychedelia and mayhem, and with great actors to pull it off.

Fight Club is oddly enough directed by Alien3 director David Fincher. I hated Alien3, but who would have guessed that one of his films will end up in my favorites. This movie is great, strange and crazy, but that's why I love it. A great cult film that should be a classic.

Spartacus
Spartacus(1960)

Probably the less Kubrick-ish of the Stanley Kubrick films. The spectacular Spartacus lacks many of Kubrick's film methods; it barely has any of his traditional cinematography, but even so, that doesn't stop this movie from being one big spectacle from the classic era when epics came out like Pokémon games today. This film doesn't feel the necessity of having either a happy ending or a backstory for our main character; oddly enough, it does bother a lot often.

First off, I felt this movie was more Kirk Douglas than Kubrick. Sure, he produced it and hired Kubrick to direct it, but I felt he wanted to use this to show himself-off, doing extremely amazing stuff and having literally no faults. It redeems itself a bit because of the sad ending, but the damage was done. I also thought the character Spartacus itself had not much development. We didn't know why he was who he was; we just had to assume "He's that". Well, he is anything BUT a character. My other problem where some politics scenes, most of them being boring. Sure it's part of the plot, but, it's still boring. With those problems out, this would have been a perfect epic. But the rest it's just in the expected high Kubrick quality level; my personal favorite scene was the battle with God knows how many extras playing three to four whole armies. Epic as hell.

Spartacus is another Kubrick success and being a fan of epics, I enjoyed this, even with all its flaws. Not perfect, but still spectacular, Spartacus is an eternal cry for freedom even today.

Cloud Atlas
Cloud Atlas(2012)

The thing with ambitious long films is that they have difficulties in the story-telling. It's not the first time in Cloud Atlas; we also have Tree of Life, The Fountain, even The End of Evangelion, all with out-of-the-senses narrative and with an unlike pacing. But watching such movies also delivers quite a sense of grandeur, seeing how the film actually accomplishes something, one thing at least, but a big one. Cloud Atlas is a good movie that has great elements in every time period it takes. All with rich visuals, great performances and almost every kind of sensation ever done in motion picture history. Doesn't sound that ambitious now huh? (Sarcasm, you idiot).

I liked how all these stories feel so different and yet they form one sole story that shares a similar theme. Yeah, it's all about everything being connected somehow, how a little fraction of something can change something else not only in the future, but also in the past, and with that, out present too. Ambitious, huh? The challenging part of Cloud Atlas is both his length and tight narrative. We actually see all the 6 timelines together, and that requires some patience, because it always gets to that part where you shout: "Oh yeah, that story too about the...yeah". The same thing happened to the second Hobbit film, with many stories trying to be told in real time. But at least that was one timeline to follow, their middle-age present, but Cloud Atlas does a much more challenging 6 timelines to develop in real time, that's insane! It does well, but has its problems. I would say the Hobbit 2 did much better in telling many stories at the same time.

If there's something that clearly overcomes all these tight narrative issues, is how well it executes each of the timelines. The 1849 timeline has a great slave-morality story; the 1936 story has a great Amadeus-ish, homosexual-romance story; the 1973 has a great reporter story; the 2012 timeline has a funny old-age story (with Hugo Weaving playing a NURSE CARE in an Asylum for the old people); The 2144 is an entertaining sci-fi futuristic story and the Big Isle timeline is a great...story, of whatever kind of story it is. It has great elements in each segment and, through difficult, Cloud Atlas is also an ambitious and thought-provoking epic film with a little bit of everything for everyone. Another great work from the Wachowskis.

The Shining
The Shining(1980)

It is known that this adaptation tones down a lot the supernatural elements from Stephen King novel, transforming The Shining from a ghost story to a human insanity story...and I like human insanity better. The thing is this: a supernatural story often uses more visuals, while the human insanity requires less visuals and more "attitudes" to be executed. Stanley Kubrick's The Shining is actually a visual insanity film. It changes much from the book, but from the way I see it, it does it for the better of the story. That's what an adaptation does: change things but only if it makes the story better in any way, and this film surely does the rule in a 100%.

I think this is far superior to King's novel, as I felt a more believable story is more intriguing. When it comes to supernatural stuff, I like serious things, and this movie manages itself at such point. There are "ghosts" and other strange stuff, but only in the characters' minds. In the novel, it is obvious that the place is cursed, but it's better and scarier when it's all in the mind of characters that themselves can't tell the difference between imagination and realism. This is improving and adapting at its best, by the hand of Kubrick. Speaking of which, this film also includes all those Kubrick nods, like the long dolly shots, symmetric angles, wide-angles; all kinds of cinematography to engage you visually so it can engage you by character too. When it comes to Nicholson, I think he did a great performance, but I couldn't help but laugh at times when he's going nuts. Scary, it was, but also funny. Other than that, I think this is another great Kubrick masterpiece, and also a masterpiece in horror overall.

Kubrick once again shows he was the best in everything he could do. The film also has some symbolic stuff (that bear fellatio scene...) and I'm always a fan of that kind of movies, the difference is that this one is scary too. It created such a creepy environment that will always be in my memory as, well, the most memorable for inducing me at levels no other horror films had done. A movie that just gets better over the years.

Enter the Dragon

Hearing Bruce Lee while fighting is unintentionally hilarious, while also seeing his facial expressions doing the same thing. With that out of the way, Enter The Dragon is one huge martial arts classic that even has been regarded as one of the best films of 1973 and Culturally or Historically Significant by the National Film Registry. Being a fan of Martial Arts films, I was anxious to watch this, and the result was great. Bruce Lee is still the master even after Jackie Chan or Jet Lee, or even Tony Jaa. This film can also be a huge excuse to watch Lee doing what he does better: scream! Just kidding, kicking everyone's asses with that "I'm Invincible" face he always carries.

Bruce also proved to be a legit actor, as his performance was actually decent and his English also good. It's curious how this movie has little to none character development, and yet the characters are memorable; maybe it's because we see what they can do and they do it in a very cool way. Transformers does the same but the result isn't nearly as good. I guess they have some charm we can't help but feel, as they martial arts skills easily drags us in. Undeniably a classic.

Enter the Dragon still works today, but maybe not the same way. There's Ong Bak and many other films that had shown much more skilled or believable fight movements and martial arts, but something they will never reach, it's the charm that Bruce Lee had in every film, and this one is no exception at all. I feel like doing some punches and scream like I having my balls removed. HHHYYAAAAAAHHH!

Conan the Barbarian

Rushed, lazy, preposterous, gory, underwritten, under-characterized, and lackluster are only some very few insulting words anyone can use to describe this film. You can also call it dull, laughable and under-done; you can spend years searching for words to insult this as it deserves and still not finish. You can dig on a dictionary and then look for urban words to try and insult this some more. You can even make up words to do so. With simply looking for 5 insults you already put more effort than the people who made this movie.

I haven't seen Schwarzenegger's original, so I thought I could have a legit opinion on this without comparisons. It's hard to do so when the movie ends up being awful in every cinematic aspect. Music? Nevermind. Acting? Does that exist for this movie?. Effects? I prefer Michael Bay's overblown-ness. Story? I don't think this qualifies. Dialogue? Cut from every single sword-related movie ever done. I can't find one good thing about this, other than the first two acts being unintentionally funny for its blandness and rush to get things done, resulting in only half-measures, nothing compelling or accomplished. By the third act you get sick of this movie's awfulness, and all you get for getting that far is a bland and lackluster climax, one a million of other movies had done better. The movie has some good environments though; it's actually pretty nicely done. You do get some Barbarina-ish feeling from it. However it's sad how the lifeless objects deliver more than the living beings in this movie. The scenarios are more vivid than the characters, if there were any.

Conan The Barbarian it's just a forgettable and unforgivable piece of garbage that seems to have come out from the imagination of a 13 year old being bored to death. All it wants is to look cool, but it's obnoxious. Simply a dreadful experience. Mortal Kombat Annihilation has more dignity tan this, however only a little bit; I just feel like watching Annihilation one more time and not this Barbarian crap. This is just too much cheese for me.

Rope
Rope(1948)

While not doing puns over death thematics, Rope also becomes an absorbing movie experience that masterfully manages the thrills and tension it wants to share. Also taking the role of an experimental film, this is a unique Hitchcock film and a unique film overall, by making the movie act as a play.

There's a huge attention to detail here rarely seen in movies today. Last year's Gravity had a great tracking shot that lasted more than 10 minutes at the beginning and some other long shots here and there; well, Rope is mostly and essentially one long tracking shot. The camera cuts to another angle at times, but quickly gets back into the long shots, thus creating a really in-depth experience, making us feel we are really there. Also, the cuts are only when really necessary, another great technique from Hitchcock, who knew about timing. Running only some mere 80 minutes, this film is an easy-going, assuring its re-watching value and giving you more opportunities to admire it.

Technically low on sight, the film is nevertheless huge outside of the camera. Moving the set during the shots surely wasn't easy, and at the end you can't help but admire it. The background subtly changes from broad daylight to night and even the clouds move! Too sad it wasn't a big hit back then, cause it surely deserved to be it. Rope delivers exactly how Hitchcock intended it, therefore remarking himself once more as one of cinema's great directors.

Red Dragon
Red Dragon(2002)
½

What? Brett Ratner directed this? I guess he suffered the Shyamalan disease of becoming an awful director then. It is surprising that a director like Ratner used to have care on character and substance in contrast to his later films. Red Dragon is a great addition to the Hannibal tetralogy that follows the novel pretty closely. Another film also did that, years prior to this, resulting in Manhunter, Lecter's actual first appearance on the celluloid, played then by Brian Cox; but I haven't seen that yet, that kinda helps me to rate this movie without any comparisons.

What I like about this movie is the atmosphere that it carries all the way. It's like having the sensation of being hunted at any second, proves a thrilling experience at the end. Hopkins is back as Lecter, and at this point, 11 years after Silence of the Lambs, he still got it. It still gives me creeps and also a bit of admiration for such a calculus and smart character. I've never been a huge fan of Norton, but I can recognize a great performance of his when I see it; he plays for a likeable character with the mind of a sick psychopath, but with his feet on reality all the time. Fiennes is one of my favorite actors, and here he plays such a villain: tormented, sick but kinda pitiful and with at least 1% of humanity on him that ultimately pays-off. Emily Watson also delivers, and that pretty much ends my praise on the cast, the rest is also good, but I had to mention these specially.

The music by Danny Elfman, well, it's Danny Elfman, he knows what he has to do to give the movie a boost. All is fine with the movie, but I think the main character needed a little bit of more psychopath moments, and, much like in Silence of the Lambs, I had a problem with the third act. It has a fake-out, and the aftermath is good, but not entirely necessary. With those problems fixed, this would have been a perfect movie, but I guess it's better when Silence of the Lambs is the superior film. Overall, Red Dragon is great and I liked it, but maybe it's not the kind of movie I'll come back anytime soon, maybe in a few years.

The Silence of the Lambs

This film evaded my scope for a long time. When I wanted to see it, there were a lot of obstacles. I wanted to buy it, but I was out of money. I finally get the money, but the movie is sold out. TV screenings exist, yes, but all in full-screen; just my bad luck. With the Blu Ray release it was easy to get a hold on this movie, and finally, I watched it. It was good, yeah, Oscar-worthy and all that, it's highly memorable and thrilling and chilling and scary and provoking...in the first two acts, that is. My problem with this masterpiece was the third act, which I thought was out of the movie's edgy nod of psychological and horror genre fusion.

First of all, the acting is superb. Foster and Hopkins are the best from the cast, but the rest is also top-notch. It is good that the main characters are the greatest performers. The music by Shore gave the proper ambience to each of the scenes, and I liked the cinematography a lot. I liked how the camera puts you in the point of view of Clarice, that way, you feel the character she's talking to is actually talking to you, and, when speaking to Hannibal, you also feel frightened and scared. It just gives an overall realistic tone, literally putting us in the character; that was just an ingenious idea. All was great, all was unlike anything I've seen, but then comes the Hannibal escape scene. Great scene, but after that, I felt the movie became your regular crime pursuit that you've seen a million times already. It's not an awful third act, after all, it closes the main plot, but I was hoping something more psychologically challenging. Sure it hold my nerves, but it was mostly pure horror genre, and not psychological. The movie held a great fusion between the two in the first and second act, but by the third act it was only one of them.

Nevertheless, the movie still frightens overall and does what a great movie does: it becomes timeless. It's been more than 20 years since this came out and it still frightens people, specially talking about people that already saw it a million times! A must see to say the least, or the most.

Jaws 3
Jaws 3(1983)

Poorly made it's too much of a good sentence to put it in use to describe Jaws 3's level of blandness and redundancy. Jaws 3 barely reach the laughably bad level, but even so, the movie is 80% annoyingly bad and 20% unintentionally funny. With this you just can't feel or remember the greatness of the first movie; it's gone. This movie has no scares, no thrills, no good dialogue, no good characters to care for, not even good special effects! It's all a trainwreck that annoys more than entertains.

From the many things about this movie, the only ones that you can remember are the really horrific ones. The 3D is pointless and annoying (Last Airbender level) and the effects are just terrible, but also laughable. The shark looks awful; it moves awful and never gets any thrill out of you, just...boredom. The movie has very little to talk about; it's just plain awful and redundant. Jaws have fallen so low that it reaches Uwe Boll's level now.

Jaws 3 is at the very bit least hilarious for some of its badness, but still that doesn't worth the ride at all, as in the end it's the annoyingly bad stuff that leaves with you and not the unintentionally funny bad. Sea World never looked so stupid.

Live Die Repeat: Edge of Tomorrow

Whether or not you're fan of Tom Cruise, a couple of years now, the actor has submitted himself on films that could be considered typically of action, proposing different executions. And this is always appreciated. Whether from climbing the tower Burj Khalifa in Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol, to explore the desert areas of Iceland in Oblivion. With Edge of Tomorrow, Tom Cruise gives an idea that while it is not original, is an adaptation of the Japanese graphic novel All You Need is Kill, besides having a concept we've seen in Groundhog Day, 24:01 or Replay by Ken Grimwood's novel-yet accomplishes something essential in any science fiction movie: its complexity has a well-defined universe and engages the audience from the beginning.

An alien invasion threatens to destroy all life on Earth. Major William Cage (Cruise) is one of the members of the Resistance Army, who is sent to the battlefield to ... die. However, he awakes the day before to repeat that day over and over again; and as the days pass (or day), he becomes an expert and discovers the why of his strange condition. In these first minutes, rather than be just a science fiction movie, we have a military presentation, where the director Doug Liman places the characters on the French coast with alien invaders involved. Characters bloodied, camera in hand, metal tentacled creatures, explosions, all in the spirit of the World War concept.

Just as Bill Cage's loop concept is introduced, we discover more about the enemy, the threat, the condition of the protagonist and we move interestingly through the film, all thanks to a solid performance by Tom Cruise, where humor is natural and dynamic. The chemistry with Emily Blunt accomplishes a flow, and the actress proves once again that she can hold an action movie / sci -fi (we knew that from Looper). It is also important to note that she has the best weapon that anybody can have while wearing a Aliens-like-cargo-suit: a broken propeller of a helicopter transformed into machete / high reach sword.

Within the technical side, the complexity of detail in the visual effects offers no-end-to realistic action sequences, this also thanks to the solid visuals. Moreover, the experience that is created in IMAX presented in Master Digitized- widescreen is bound with its 3D that never loses time, even in the action sequences, this coupled with a good Sound Design. However we can't say the same about the musical score by Christophe Beck; although it helps to create an atmosphere, it's not really remarkable.

The movie holds the edge over its projection, but is in its 3rd act where Doug Liman locates the movie in the comfort zone of a hundred action movies: the good must eradicate the evil. And although the film feels fresh at this point, is in this 3rd act where the film becomes a simpler production. Despite this, the end of the film manages to get those sci-fi theories that handled you from the beginning to ask questions as a spectator.

Edge of Tomorrow is a worthy film in almost every way and will please everybody's expectations. Tom Cruise still has a lot to offer and so does the sci-fi genre. Feel welcome to enjoy this film.

How to Train Your Dragon

A movie with almost every single animated movie cliché ever...HOW THE HELL DOES IT MAKE IT WORK SO GREAT?! Well, we'll get to that later on the review. How to Train Your Dragon tells the story of Hiccup, a boy that lives in a world of Vikings and, of course, Dragons. The Vikings are struggling with the dragons, and their on to find their nest and get them off the map. Everything starts to change when Hiccup finds a wounded dragon, whom he later befriends. Hiccup studies the dragon, spends time with him, and little by little starts realizing that dragons aren't bad, they're just another kind of creatures, like us. The rest of the story I'll let it out from here, cause I don't want to spoil it for those who are just looking for an opinion before seeing it.

This Dreamworks animated movie has some incredible animation, great epic music, likeable characters, funny moments and some of the most beautiful and exhilarating flying scenes ever. The animation is the star: it's just unbelievable; it's unlike anything I've seen, especially in a movie that has many clichés in such a way, that they make them necessary to progress in the story, but in a good way. Now, for that point previously stated at the beginning: why do the clichés work here? Almost as if they were the first time anyone uses them? Well, it's all on storytelling and characters: the storytelling is paced correctly, like if it where meticulously timing it to get it right; and the characters are well developed: when a cliché is on, it doesn't simply happen or anything, we actually see the characters change or emotions through these clichés, making them work. Also, it's just the setting they use, it's the right one.

Another thing I have to point out is the feeling I have through this movie. It's almost as if I was watching something that Pixar would envy. Something that raises the bar for Dreamworks, and it surely did. It was something unexpected, but also surprising by effect. And who doesn't like pleasant surprises?

How to Train Your Dragon might be the best use of 3D animation I've seen for an animated movie, and vastly superior to James Cameron's Avatar in 3D experience. The sequel is coming soon, and I can only set my hopes in middle mode, as even I know sometimes is easy to fuck up. We'll see if they can exceed this movie's magnificence in the next one.

The Seventh Seal (Det Sjunde inseglet)

God, Death and many other Biblical nods never looked and felt so scary before. The Seventh Seal, truly a classic, has cinematography unlike any other, with superposition of visual plains, lightning and some symbolic imagery, and of course, some philosophic dialogue and then yet-to-be great actors, like Max von Sydow.

The film tells the journey of Antonious Block as he literally faces Death in a chess game, only trying not to save his life, but to slow down his end so he can make something truly "meaningful" for once in his life. As he goes along with his friend Jons, he meets other people that will share his same fate. The interesting things appear in the journey, as they come across many situations and people, with death, God and many other existential themes are around them. Certainly I felt different watching this film, as I knew what and how it wanted to tell the story, and it even gets scary and creepy at times, but being justifiable at the same time, something movies doesn't do anymore.

The cinematography is really good; the shots capture more than you see, as there are things in the background that you spot, but there's some stuff in the fourth-ground too that maybe you're missing. It's mere symbolism, but that's the charm about it. The shots where "Death" appears are filmed 100% accurately, as the character takes the shot and makes it what it needs to be. The environment of the film is constant and feels great, even if it is about death and the overall end; here it's too charming to not love it.

This movie is one of the most artistically well-done of all time, and while it has its flaws, the good stuff is so good to be weighted down by anything. If you're a fan of cinema, this is a movie you can't miss; it is a great piece of art and cinematography. It combines the two and results in pure masterpiece-ish...yeah, I said that stupid thing. Truly a great work of cinema for all times.

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

Wow, this is painful. Wayyy too painful. This movie just got everything lost, everything. This is easily one of the worst sequels of all time. It got bigger, but also lost, and big time too. What's wrong with this movie? What's right with this movie is a more proper question. Revenge of the Fallen can have all the action, explosions and special effects it wants, but certainly has indifference to have good scriptwriting, good characters, good acting, fast pacing, and all those details that makes a movie worthy of our time and money. Seriously, they can spend nights without sleeping by creating the robots piece-by-piece, but they can even spend one night pulling the script? That's bullshit.

Revenge of the Fallen is obnoxiously overlong, with a story that is thin but gets way too convoluted and confusing, with so many details that don't make sense and it's inconsistent as fuck, with hundreds of plot holes and conveniences. This could have been the worst detail of this movie: the overall writing, but we're still about to get there. The other details however are also big problems to not overlook. The human characters try to have depth, but their charming and innocence is gone, so it doesn't work. The villain is nothing special: they keep saying how powerful he is, but he barely does anything in the movie, and when he gets a fight with Optimus at the very last minutes of the movie, he gets his robotic ass handed to himself, being very easily destroyed, and pretty quick for such "powerful" thing. He barely does any villainy, most of the job is done by Megatron, shouldn't he be the leader? The editing at the action scenes can be confusing at times, and half of the time we don't know who's fighting who and who is doing anything.

There's also this giant robot composed by I don't know how many Decepticons that looks cool and powerful, but it's on screen for like 2 minutes and a half and seems to be pretty easy to destroy too. I guess this movie has a talent for having the weakest "most powerful" dudes ever. The movie has a very inconsistent pacing, the first third is pretty much well-paced, but the second third is where the story and characters get lost, with explaining the plot too much and adding many plot holes, and we also have almost no action during this third, this is after Optimus is killed (yeah, he dies and gets revived at the very last 5 minutes before the credits, no kidding) and it feels to go on forever. The last third last like an hour and is nothing but fighting. Absolutely nothing but fucking shit getting blowed-up, Transformers fighting, many guns shooting, too much slow-mo, too much noise and, well, this is point where the movie just gets too convoluted and too overloaded with destruction, that's it, and after that overlong fighting scene is done, the movie ends almost immediately after, literally, the bad guy is destroyed and the movie end like a minute later. Maybe that's why they made the final hour pure action, they didn't have any story left. No doubt about it.

But by far, the worst detail is the racist stereotypes that also get heavily tiring and offensive. The only stereotype they didn't exploit was the black man that speaks like if he was rapping all the time. They seriously decided to use every single stereotype except for the most famous one? I don't know if feel good for that or disappointed that they can't even get their own incompetence right. This movie it's just too tiring, long, over-produced and obnoxious to enjoy at all. Every time I watch it, I only see the action scenes, nothing more; they're the only good things other than the special effects. The rest is awfully done, and I'm surely pissed-off by how this movie turned out to be. It should have been a fun time, but it was simply too much to buy. This is easily one of the worst sequels of all time and one of the worst experiences I've had in movies in my entire life. This movie is so bad, it is even recognized by the director Michael Bay itself and Shia LeBeouf as an awful piece of shit. Good thing they apologized...after getting more than 800 million at the box office already, that is. Guess it's too late to say don't watch this, so...yeah, our lost is their gain. A movie that has too much to offer, that we can't just take it all at once. Something good to say about this movie? It's better than Manos...yeah, that's it.

Lethal Weapon 4

Yeah, it doesn't have the conviction of the first movie, it certainly doesn't take the plot seriously, but, at this point ¿What were you expecting? If there's Jet Li, there's gotta be some spectacle to exploit him. Lethal Weapon 4 is my favorite sequel of the series, with constant action scenes and even some ridiculously spectacular ones too to show the franchise's final efforts to capitalize on itself. It was fun, and that's the least I expect from a movie with this cast and director.

Lethal 4 is by no means the less flawed of the franchise; probably it's the most troublesome about it. Nevertheless, at this point all I'm expecting is huge fun, even if it is ridiculous. If there's people that like Rocky IV, easily there's people that like Lethal 4, and I'm part of them. Yeah, I kinda hate Rocky IV, but I can't help it. In Lethal 4 I do find some reasons to love it more than hate it. Maybe it's because it does entertain me legitimately, or because Glover and Gibson still had it as Murtaugh and Riggs, or because their characters do face new facets of their lives: Riggs is dealing with marrying once more, and not only that, also becoming a father, while Murtaugh is dealing with becoming a grandfather and father-in-law of a person he's not very friendly with. In Rocky IV, the characters didn't evolve and didn't go anywhere they already went through. Here, in Lethal 4, they actually face new things, both also dealing with getting too old for this shit. This is also the longest of the series, running two hours and 7 minutes. Those were two hours and seven minutes of my life I don't regret spending here. I had fun, big fun, and I liked it.

Maybe I'm either too young or too old for this shit, but I liked this final entry in the series. You know there are worse out there, and I think this one holds itself as one of those final entries that we can love. It has action and fun, no strings attached. A bit more conviction from the first movie would have made this the best in the series, but for what it is, I was satisfied. Lethal 4 goes out with a bang, and it's one of my favorite action movies...and also one of the most ridiculous.

How to Train Your Dragon 2
½

Dreamworks is capable of making great sequels, sometimes better than the first, like Kung Fu Panda 2 or Shrek 2. How to Train Your Dragon 2 is another example on the list. Right now, I'm gonna say this: I like the first one better, but that doesn't mean this is awful, this is still great. How to Train Your Dragon was so awesome that its sequel is inferior, and still manages to be unbelievable. Bigger in every aspect, this sequel has more of what you loved about the first and some new cool stuff.

Instead of going the safer way, this sequel offers you the next step in the concept: more Dragons, more abilities, more mature characters, more answers and more spectacle too. We have all those pretty flying scenes, helped by the energy, the background and the music by John Powell to offer a truly worthy experience. The animation is great, the camera angles are great, the environment is great, everything's great with this movie. Yet I liked the first one better because I felt they did get everything climatic at the third act, while this one has one that, while good, it's overshadowed by the middle part, which is a fantastic battle scene of Dragons and all that stuff. There are also some issues with the villain here. Yes, there is one, but after an interesting build-up, it's only a generic one that only grunts and it's defeated (I don't think that's a spoiler at all). And I certainly know that Dreamworks can do a good villain, like in Kung Fu Panda 2, so it's kind of a letdown in that department.

This sequel, while not superior, it's still great. It perfectly does what a sequel should do and provides huge fun for all family. Let me tell you this: watch this, watch Transformers: Age of Extinction in July and tell me which movie is more mature. You probably know the answer by now.

Lethal Weapon 3
½

Many see this as a letdown. In my case, that was Lethal Weapon 2, while this 3rd entry was actually pretty enjoyable, and even in some cases, everything but disappointing. Lethal Weapon 3 has all the joy of Gibson-Glover just like the other three movies, but this time they also dedicate some personal issues with each other, cementing their buddy-cop friendship we all love. We also have some great action scenes and some humor too. Yet it isn't a great movie.

Sure it is fun, and in my sight, much more balanced and interesting than the previous movie, but I still felt this lacked something that the first movie has. I still don't know what it could be, but it still isn't here. Joe Pesci was just out-there, nothing really funny and almost annoying, being there only to either make everything worse or simply had some desperate comedy relief, and it certainly doesn't work. At this point I decided to give up on character development, as only Glover and Gibson's characters are the stars. And, given the case, here we have some character evolution in both characters.

Murtaugh is now feeling the mid-life crisis and there's one scene where he even faces a morality issue: killing a young criminal, a close friend of his son. It's actually a pretty decent theme that no one talks about when reviewing this movie, and that's certainly unfair. On the other hand, Riggs deals once more with true love, but contrary to Lethal Weapon 2, where his love interest was there just to be killed in a desperate way to try to do drama; here they actually give Riggs a genuine love interest...that only takes 3 days to fall in love with...Disney too much? Nevertheless, she's a pretty good character and gets a share of the action.

Speaking of which, the action scenes are great and entertaining, and even intense at times. That long chase scene with the villains on a car and Riggs on motorcycle was some unforgettable stuff right there. I really liked this movie better than the second: it has more character issues and bigger action scenes. It might get repetitive, but if you like this stuff, then you surely want more of it, so how can you go wrong? Lethal Weapon 3 was an improvement, even if many don't see it that way. It has all the elements that 2 should have had and most of the charm of the franchise. A fine entry in the franchise.

Lethal Weapon 2

A fun, yet very inferior sequel, Lethal Weapon 2 has many action scenes, but there's a lot it needed to cram in there for me. The main leads are still as fun as ever, probably going for a deeper development, and the action scenes are bigger, yet I just felt nothing was specially compelling or memorable. I mean, it wasn't awful, and it's not even a bad movie, just doesn't have that much for me.

The plot is simple and it's very predictable, characters other than the leads are merely established and not developed (but maybe it wasn't all that necessary) and, while the comedy is good, I felt it was a bit more slapstick than actual jokes...yet, I like good slapstick so there's not that huge problem here. I don't know, I liked this, just not as much as the first. The first had something about it, I don't know what it is, but it isn't here. This surely is superior to many other action movies of the time, I'm sure of that. Plus, this is a sequel, and normally those are terrible, but this one is surprisingly very well done, and I guess I can go with that and call myself "satisfied" in some way.

Lethal Weapon 2 is good, not as good as the first, but the chemistry between Gibson and Glover is still enough to hold the entire movie, with all its flaws and all the rest. There's something this lacked, and whatever it is, it still holds up for those that liked the first Lethal Weapon, and for those that like the buddy-cop genre overall. A nice sequel to a classic action film.

Lethal Weapon

Back then, a groundbreaking action film. Today, a classic-fun buddy cop action movie. This pretty much established all the buddy-cop nods that became clichés in other movies of the same sub-genre. Bad Boys, End of Watch, many other movies using tired clichés that Lethal Weapon redefined, and one can see why. First off, this is only the first step in the Gibson-Glover fun team-up that still today remains the most beloved cop-buddies in film, all in the hand of Superman director, Richard Donner.

Saying what's good about this film is easy if I just tell the things that bothered me instead, the rest it's just fine: This really isn't a great movie, it has some shitty character development, save for the main leads (and that kinda holds the movie alone) and has a, who do I call it? Uneven pacing. Things happen fast and without a constant rhythm, and some of the emotional issues of the main leads are solved merely by action scenes, and no real reason. Yeah, it is true. But this was a much simpler time, as action movies didn't need to be dark or smart, just fun, exhilarating and re-watchable. I had similar issues with RoboCop, the 80's original. I'm mostly a guy from the 90's, and even so, I'm not a huge fan of 90's movies, I'm mostly a contemporary guy, I like the dark and smart action movies now. Yet I do recognize a classic when I see it, and Lethal Weapon is certainly one hell of a classic action movie.

Well, it's hard for me to fall in love this movie; it's a bit too simple for my preferences. But even so, it is good, not great, but good, nearly-great. It is huge fun, just like the action movies of yesterday. But maybe it isn't that the action movies of before where better, maybe we were just younger. Years from now, many will call movies like the Dark Knight trilogy "dated" and movies like "Her" as "ridiculous", and maybe in some years, we will not like the future movies after our time. Yet, a really good movie is timeless, and Lethal Weapon might, MIGHT be one of these movies. A huge pile of fun.

Godzilla
Godzilla(2014)
½

Godzilla left the theaters for nearly 10 years, and now, closing in to his 60th anniversary, he comes back, on the second 100% American production of his career. Gareth Edwards presents a Godzilla film very different from any other in the franchise. The franchise goes like this: the first movie (Gojira) is more serious and tragic, and the other 28 films (including Roland Emmerich's shitty film) are merely entertainment kaiju films. This new movie comes as a surprise; as Gareth Edwards gives his Godzilla film a "Jaws" treatment. The Jaws treatment is the classic "hide the beast" for at least 1 hour, and even then, have only some glimpses of it. Yes, this happened here: Godzilla is mostly kept out of sight for most of the first half of the movie.

Just to let things clear, I have watched this movie TWICE already in order to come with a proper comment. I get to the conclusion that this Godzilla film is like another beloved Godzilla film, Destroy All-Monsters. In that film, all the monsters, including Godzilla, are only mentioned, little glimpses of them are shown, and the last minutes are simply them kickin' the ass of Godzilla's most classic rival, King Ghidorah. This also happens here. Godzilla is merely a monster like the alien from Ridely Scott's film, (not that he's an alien, he's still a mutated creature) it appears slightly at times, until it comes all out in the third act. Yeah, that can and will be a huge downside for a lot of people. The titular monster (I'm not giving spoilers in the following) is only for like 5 seconds in the opening credits, 30 seconds in the second act, and in every minute of the final act. Nevertheless I, having watched the movie twice, think that's a great way to fully enjoy the film's climatic battle of the King of Monsters versus two new monsters, known as "Muto 1" and "Muto 2". Yes, Godzilla fights here and big time. I felt like a 10 year old seeing his wishes coming true.

Before getting to the real good stuff, let's talk about the biggest problems with this movie. There's way too much human story and not enough Godzilla for the keepers. Nevertheless, the little runtime of the monster on-screen should provide huge entertainment. The other problem is how constantly they keep the monster in the background or as something we don't want to see. Really? Why we wouldn't want to watch the King of Monsters fighting monsters? That's why we came here in the first place. The movie even tricks you 3 times in the climax, while Godzilla fights the Mutos. Without giving anything out, I can say the camera focuses Godzilla and the monsters, and pans down slowly to the humans, while the fight is still on, then the camera follows the humans until the monsters are out of sight, still fighting. That really pisses everyone off, cause we want to see the battle. But still, they have the courtesy of cutting to the big battle everytime they do that, and there are some really cool moments. The other problem would be that the roles are a little too thin for the cast. Again, I'm not giving away anything, I'm just going to say that when the movie was done, in both the times I saw it, I forgot that Bryan Cranston was in the movie. Nuff' Said. Not because I hate him, no way, I love Bryan Cranston. And Aaron Taylor-Johnson gets too much spotlight at times; even his character gets overlong runtime. But as long as they actually show the King of Monsters, even for the last 30 minutes of the movie, I'm sold.

And now, the great stuff. Godzilla appears not as much as many would think, maybe for a total of 33 minutes out of the 2 hour and 5 minutes runtime, but those 33 minutes are the best of the movie. The first time you get to see the monster in all his glory it's one of the franchise's best moments, and when he fights the Mutos...maybe even one of the best movie moments of the year. Godzilla has many problems, but the good stuff is way too good to not see it. One way you can watch this movie is thinking about it as Jaws meets Godzilla. You'll find the similarities by yourself. Yeah, it is a big deal that Godzilla is not as much as it should, but it could have been worse. Many will say that Roland Emmerich's Godzilla showed more of the monster, and that it is better. But, let's face it guys, that Iguana-like reptile attacking New York isn't Godzilla, it's just a giant Iguana, even Toho (the company that created Godzilla and made all the films) renamed the Iguana monster "Zilla", a monster that the Americans misunderstood as Godzilla. What a perfect analogy.

Overall, this film is not up to what we expected, but maybe because, let's think about it: Godzilla has been out of the theatres for 10 years, a whole decade. Cinema has changed so much, and sagas have been rebooted in order to survive. Maybe it's time for Godzilla to change. He has been in 28 films with the same formula; it's time for something different, and good. This is good. This isn't the best Godzilla film, but it's still a good one. It took me time and one re-watch to take it in, but I did. The good stuff here it's just too good for you to lose! You need to go and see it to live such moments. It isn't the Godzilla you wanted, but it's the one we need now.

Godzilla: Final Wars

I must say I felt heavily alienated for the most part. The film itself seems to forget for a whole hour and nine minutes that this is not only a Godzilla film, but the final one. To be the big finale of the King of Monsters, the movie doesn't feel Godzilla-ish for the most of it. I don't know if hate or love this movie. I can hate it because it takes half of its running time to offer the actual monster that's on the title, and because the music is totally laughable, while also the execution is motive of laughs. Or I can love it because it has Godzilla destroying everything for almost the entire last hour, and for fighting his greatest foe at the climactic battle, King Ghidorah. As the very end of a 50 year-long saga, this is not entirely satisfying, but it's highly spectacular and, of course, fun to watch.

And that's because of the action scenes present here: there's a lot, there's also a lot of flashy effects, explosions, punches and aliens. It is perfect to waste time, and there's a lot for everyone: the first hour is mostly just a dumb-Japanese generic action film, and the second hour is pure monster madness, probably the greatest of the series. Speaking of which, something I admire from this movie is its size: for the final film, that's admirable. There's a lot of places they go and a lot they have to cover, and they do a pretty decent job. To be honest, the movie is full of little details that makes it "good" in some points of view. Godzilla fights its own American version from 1998. That's right, the Roland Emmerich's Godzilla appears here, and, needless to say, kicks the bucket pretty quickly in comparison with the Japanese one. That was cool, and even great.

There's also all these monsters Godzilla fights: some classic, but also some obscure. And that also bothered me: Why Gigan? Why The Smog Monster? Why the Sea Monster? Why King Seesar? Even the final monster (Monster X) felt very Power Ranger-ish, not entirely a belonging of the Godzilla universe. However, it was all redeem by one thing: King Ghidorah. From all the monsters in the series, King Ghidorah was always like the Lex Luthor of Godzilla, the Joker of Godzilla, the Green Goblin of Godzilla; the greatest foe of the King of Monsters. Hell, the word "King" is on its name! Having him fighting Godzilla at the very last battle of the entire franchise was a great addition to the finale. Probably, the best addition that could be added to the franchise.

Now, with all those nods out of the way, let's see the really bad things: The story is beyond stupid, the movie is probably the dumbest of the franchise, the music is way too cheesy, electronic and un-epic and some of the special effects can be cool, but also laughable to death. This is an overblown Godzilla film, and I didn't felt like it was part of the franchise until King Ghidorah appeared. As the big finale of Toho's greatest monster, it's not the best...but it also could have been a lot worse, kinda like Godzilla's Revenge. The 3 star rating I'm giving here is not a unsatisfying rating, it's just that I don't know if love this or hate it. It's huge mess, but a loveable mess. It's cheesy, but it's epically cheesy. It's the finale of the King of Monsters...so far. I hope Japan re-starts Godzilla again someday to see more of the monster in both sides of the world.

FRANCHISE'S FINAL CONCLUSION:
So, that was Godzilla, ladies and gentlemen. I just watched 50 years of an icon. I can safely say the saga isn't the best, but to be continuing even today, after nearly 60 years, it has to be doing something good. There's something about this monster that keeps us charmed and that there's some huge wonder behind him. That's something I hope this year's Godzilla film understands: Godzilla is in all of us (that's from Godzilla 2000). Overall, the saga was worth it, and I officially declare myself a huge Godzilla fan. The monster and I share something: the day of birth. Godzilla was released in November 3rd, 1954, and I was born also in that day, but in another distant year; the only clue I'm giving out is that it was in a year that also ends in 4. Place your bets.

Overall rating for the franchise: 7.5 out of 10

I hope Gareth Edwards is prepared, because now I'm 1000% prepared for his Godzilla film. See ya in May 15.

Gamera: Chiisaki yusha-tachi (Gamera the Brave)

The first and only Gamera film in the Millennium series (and also his last film up to this point) will easily turn on your kid perspective and enjoy a kind-hearted and delightful Gamera film, cheesy enough to love and not enough to puke.

Gamera: The Brave starts right off with the sacrifice of the title monster in order to eliminate all the Gyaos that invade random Asian area no.51 in these movies. Years later, a little kid (our main human character) finds an egg that quickly grows as days go by, until he realizes this egg is actually a new Gamera, which he names "Toto". As expected, this film is more kid friendly than the previous trilogy, and goes for a more safe point of view and execution. It doesn't show anything new, it certainly isn't the best Gamera film, but it's entertaining to watch. There is the requisite monster action and delightful cheesiness to hold up. This feels different from other films in the series, while also still being true to it at the same time, so there is a no-cop-out factor here. The best way to enjoy this movie is having a kid's perspective, without asking too much complexity or achievement in a movie like this, just enjoy what's there to enjoy.

No film of Gamera has been produced since this. The series had been on sleep since 2006, and I think it is proper time to give the turtle monster a new reboot. Maybe even a Godzilla vs Gamera, who knows. Overall, this movie is light and safe, but entertaining and good for the kids.

Gamera 3: Revenge of Iris
½

Gamera returns! And he's not the focus this time!...wait, what? Yes, much like 2014 Godzilla, the title character doesn't seem to be the main focus of the movie, instead, either we have the rival monster or humans...seems legit.

So now a thousand and some more Gyaos' appear all over the world, and there's this prophesy or something telling that some evil is here and something's gonna give and...I'll be honest, I didn't understand the story, other than there's a girl that hates Gamera and the newest monster is using here to be there. All you need to know is that he's going to fight Gamera, that's it. So, I don't know how to qualify the story, but being this a kaiju film, I don't think I should, otherwise this would get a rotten rating.

The human characters get a bit too much focus and so does the monster Iris, while Gamera appears like twice in the movie, three if we count the girl's flashbacks, and merely for probably 20 minutes total. Yeah, short time, but we have tons of visuals to anchor the lack of monster. The action scenes are pretty stale, but full of visual wonders and some early CGI here and there. The rest in this movie is pretty standard, nothing special. I had more fun here than in Attack of Legion, but I'll still go for Guardian of the Universe better, because it has more substance to it. Revenge of Iris comes in second, but not very enlightening.

Overall, this was fine because of the visuals, but I would have liked more Gamera and more fighting in it. If it had the Gamera from the first movie and the action of the second, then this would have been the perfect Gamera movie, but for what it's worth, it's OK. All I hope for the future is a Godzilla vs Gamera movie soon; I hope the Japanese make one of those already. We had the Avengers, we can have everything.

X-Men: Days of Future Past

Refreshing. That's the word to describe this climatic entry in the X-Men saga. R-E-F-R-E-S-H-I-N-G. This shows once more that Bryan Singer is the one to do these X-Men films, cause he knows what he's doing. Days of Future Past puts all of our favorite (and non-favorite) X-Men into one big budget summer Blockbuster that has a lot to do: repair the saga, clear everything and offer memorable moments. It does it all.

The best elements from this movie are the visual effects and drama. There are action scenes too and all those nods from the previous films; it's like all was building up to this. However, since The Last Stand, no X-Men film let like the first two. First Class was good, but a different kind of good. This one has the same complexity, pacing and charm of the first two movies. There are a lot of details that makes it such, like: The Title Card sequence, similar to the ones from the first, second and, in a way, the third movie. Remember John Ottoman's X2 theme? That is also here. Oh yeah, just like old times.

In terms of the new stuff, there's plenty of it. Through the movie, there is no specific villain, just a lot of people seeking an objective to accomplish, and it's managed in such a good level it's unbelievable, even groundbreaking at times. Performances are just as great as always, both Xaviers, both Magnetos, and of course, Hugh Jackman. I don't know how much of the comic it adapts, but this it's just too good to nitpick about that. The size of this movie sure it's huge, and it's climatic just when it needs to be, it knows when to put action, when to put drama, and even comedy at times. I guess it's not a spoiler the fact that Magneto levitates an entire stadium by himself, and that is only a little test of all the climatic things that happen here. You can assure there's going to be some breathtaking moments too, so this might be one of the best experiences of the year.

But no movie is without issues; fortunately, this one has very minor ones. First of all, it isn't as action packed as expected, but that shouldn't bother anyone, cause the drama is so good that probably low action is the best for this kind of story. The other issue is that there are still some underused mutant characters, something present in every single X-Men movie to date, even this one. Yet, the fact that they act like in the comics should provide enough satisfaction for the comic fans. This other issue didn0t bother me, but could bother some other: The Wolverine has always saved the day in the other movies, save X2 and First Class, but there is a fact among audiences: Wolverine has gone overused. But here, in Days of Future Past, his participation is equal to that of other main characters, bringing a balance never seen in other Wolverine related works. It's great to see that Wolverine don't always need to save the day; after all, this is called X-Men, it's pretty much teamwork.

From the year 2014, Days of Future Past ranks in the best I've seen in the year, with powerful drama, strong story and high level of satisfaction. Is it the best X-Men movie? Me personally, I still like X2 better, but this one might came in a close second. It's a movie that makes a 7 movie saga look like new, as if it was the first time it arrives. "We need you to hope again", well, they did, now the hope for the saga is at 100%, and I can't wait until 2016's X-Men Apocalypse. Some of the best that 2014 has come up with.

The Wolverine
½

A much better movie than Origins: Wolverine and much better crafted than the usual super hero movies, yet not as satisfying. The story of The Wolverine is very good, but it needs to give time to action, cause sometimes there's too much dialogue, yet the dialogue is good too. The characters are also quite good, but some of them are disposed and when they come to action, is not that much exhilarating when they fight, but the acting is great.

The musical score just passes by; it didn't get my attention. I was expecting something a bit more recurrent in terms of action, but sometimes it feels absent. But scenes like the bullet train action and the fight of Mariko's father and Wolverine are great action scenes. The action however is toned down at the climax, lacking punches or slashes; I was expecting an epic Wolverine vs Silver Samurai, but the fight is quick and lacks choreography. Overall, the Wolverine is a good, entertaining movie, but with problems, not only in action.

I don't know if recommend it, but if I had to, it will be because of the scene after credits, which is the best part of the movie in my opinion, and because the movie completely deletes the bad taste of Origins Wolverine. At least this is much better than Origins, we have to give credit for that, and this raises the bar and expectations for the next movie, Days of Future Past. This can be taken as a new and very interesting way to make Super-hero movies...if that's the case, the genre has a bright future.

X-Men: First Class

While the night might seem eternal, the sun will always rise again. First Class is the sun on the X-Men saga, after falling dreadfully to their close death with The Last Stand and Origins: Wolverine. Reinventing the saga, the origin of Xavier and Magneto's friendship and rivalry is told, bringing us to where it all began. All with a good script, great performances and our delightful cheesiness just like in the comics.

First Class approaches the wrecked friendship of Professor X and Magneto as the movie's strongest element. We see how the met, how they enjoy being friends, and the events and thoughts that drive them to be enemies in a personal war. It's curious how this X-Men film (one of the best, of course) has some of the most boring mutants and yet results in a very likeable entry. This is thanks to Matthew Vaughn's stylish direction and sharp focus, with attention to detail and tone. The movie's tone makes the film practically impossible to bore, so does the story, making us curious in how this will be resolved, every event, every character.

There are some action scenes too, but those appear only when necessary, just like in the good X-Men films! The thing here is making the movie dramatic enough to care about story and not enough to become over-the-top. Many fans had weird feeling towards the villain Sebastian Shaw, being different from the comics here in the movie. They are right, it is different...better, actually. I think they adapted this villain well, transcending from its paper form to the screen performed by Kevin Bacon, who convinces as the villain.

Just like any X-Men movie, there are some underused or undeveloped mutants, but here they make sure they are at least, interesting the enough. Well done. I almost forgot: there is some humor here, and well, it's good, just what a comic book movie needs. First Class also has the "Epic Beginning" feeling. What's that? It's when you see the origins of a story you already know: you know what the characters will be in the future, and seeing how and why, it makes you feel good, seeing all the went through to get to that point. That always makes any event exciting, and works most of the time. The music's good, the special effects are good and it's simply a fine entry in the series.

X-Men First Class is one of the best comic book movies, and gives new life to the saga, hope all sequels can keep up from now on. Fun, exciting and even delightfully cheesy, this new X-Men shows again why we all love the mutants...well, the inside story in the comic says another thing but, yeah.

X-Men Origins - Wolverine
½

You think it couldn't be any worse than The Last Stand? I did too, and we were terribly wrong. An entire movie dedicated to the most badass mutant ever should have been more...badass, but we only got a rushed, generic and poorly visualized movie with Wolverine. X-Men Origins: Wolverine tells the origin of such mutant, with apparently a lot of things going on at the same time. Don't worry, none of those worth.

The script it's just terrible. It's far lazier than The Last Stand, with predictable dialogue, bad lines, bad humor and undeveloped characters that never got far from poor establishment. There's Deadpool, Gambit, Cyclops, Sabretooth and much other poorly executed mutants to hold on the movie's atrocious story. Hearing such dreadful dialogue it's embarrassing. Also, who is this Gavin Hood director guy? Was he the perfect choice for this film? Clearly not.

The movie has a lot of constant action scenes, but they feel like the dumb action affair of movies that think explosions and more explosions are the best. It isn't. Needless to say, the special effects are awful. We can tell when something is CGI in every movie, but at least it combines with the environment. Here, the CG is so terrible that nothing seems to fit right. What happened? This is simply a huge trainwreck.

But to be fair, this is entertaining as hell. I mean, it's generic, but not boring. The familiar narrative makes it easier to go along and the action scenes, while dumb, also entertain. It's terrible, but not God awful, just the kind of bad that we see all the time; it's just dreadful that an X-Men movie had to be like this. It's better than anything Michael Bay can do, so that's a relief. It can be your next guilty pleasure. Not awful, but I pass.

X-Men: The Last Stand

We all know it sucks by this far, so this truly isn't a surprise at all. The Last Stand is over-the-top, cheesy, underplotted, simple but not adequately simple, this because it comes after two very well done, very well thought and well executed movies. The new stuff is boring and underused, and the old stuff feels less fresh and more generic.

First of all, there's the comic book stuff: the famous Phoenix saga is horribly adapted here, so does the Phoenix character herself. Even her counterpart, Jean Grey, isn't as interesting as before, and doesn't convince as a villain, it actually annoys. The characters themselves didn't go anywhere, and they even got backwards from their evolution. This always pisses me off in everytime. Also, Cyclops gets killed, Xavier gets killed, Rogue gets pulled aside big time, Mystique gets pulled aside too, the new mutants are generic and boring (yeah, even the Juggernaut, bitch) and the overall affair seems more cartoon-ish than cinematic. Blandness everywhere.

The movie is also lazy, with predictable storytelling, it's practically one plot stretched through the movie: the war is on...yeah, what else? The Phoenix? No, that's so unused it doesn't reach the plot thread. Character development as a plot? No, there's none of that. There is just one simple plot in the entire movie, even with all that cure thing going on, that thing simply resolves itself at the end of the movie; it's just bad.

There's no more I can say that hasn't been said about this movie: it's a disappointment...but entertaining. Yeah, it is entertaining, but it doesn't worth it this time. Bland, without complexity, effort or care, The Last Stand is the blandest Last Stand ever seen. Disappointing and highly deplorable.

X2: X-Men United

It's weird how many people call the first X-Men the benchmark for comic book movies. It was good on managing a lot of characters, but something harder and even ambitious, is to evolve these characters and establish new ones. X2 not only accomplish that, but also gets everything else bigger, better, more powerful, more entertaining, more provoking, more climatic, more exiting...this is one of the best comic book movies ever. This SHOULD be regarded as the so-called benchmark of the comic book movies.

X2 makes everything bigger without overwriting it. It knows how many stories it manages, and closes all of them while leaving some loose ends good enough to have us guessing, but not so much to feel this was an incomplete story. Much like the first movie (only, better) it accomplished what it wanted to accomplish, but it also accomplished much more in the way. This is like a pre-Dark Knight formula of making sequels: make everything bigger and better, but not dumber. Well, it does have some dumb moments, but, like I said, this is a pre-Dark Knight, not entirely perfect, but very close.

The performances are great once again, and the cast seem to have grown on the characters, which is good. One of the things I didn't like from the first X-Men was the music, done by Michael Kamen. It didn't felt energetic or fitting, but this time, John Ottman made a great score to fit this second installment. Another proof of how to make everything better and bigger. The movie is fine and well, but there are two major problems I had with this movie:

First, between the transition from the first to the second act, the movie got kinda slow or not very exhilarating, while that was fixed later on, it still was pretty bothering. And second, (SPOILERS) the death of Jean Gray was not only very cheesy, but also stupid. Couldn't she move the aircraft while being inside of it? I'm pretty sure she could, she seemed very powerful before, she even took down a torpedo that was out of the ship early in the film. Not only that, she was also able stop a highly pressurized water wall with one hand while levitating the ship with the other, and not only that, but also being able to use Charle's mind to say goodbye and not enabling Nightcrawler to teleport, while ALSO controlling the ship by her own...yeah, she IS very powerful, she just forgot it...how could that happen? Couldn't she levitate herself along with the ship to get the fuck out of the danger? I'm kinda being nit-picking here, but I can't stop, because I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one to find this moment incredibly convenient just to have the Phoenix in the next movie (which, is no surprise, didn't work well). (SPOILERS END).

X2 is an awesome early example of great comic book movie that tends to get overlooked at times. We must not forget the ones that actually teach how to be bigger and better. One of my favorite comic book movies of all time. We'll see if Days of Future Past can exceed this movie's awesomeness.

X-Men
X-Men(2000)
½

With the newest X-Men film coming up, I thought a re-watch of the trilogy would be nice. My problems with the first X-Men where huge at first, but this re-watch after some years since the last time I checked it have got it better. I suddenly found a lot of what I didn't catch, and it certainly helped my experience with the movie. Needless to say, I felt like a child, just like I was the first time I saw this. I was a kid, I loved it, and it was a comic book adapted to the big screen. I re-watched it as a teenager, I kinda felt bored. Now, as an adult, I can certainly say my ultimate verdict about 2000's X-Men: it's great, but not my favorite of the now long-running franchise.

First, it is surprising that this movie had a three act structure with so many characters to pull-off, and having done it great, it's even more surprising. Overcrowded comic book movies today don't know how to develop their stories well, like the recent Spider-Man film, which overcrowded canvas didn't have any kind of third act structure, just a bunch of plots building up to the next movie...yeah, we actually came to see such plots get closed, not hanged. It's weird how Marvel did this good in X-Men and not Spider-Man, whom seems to have a lot of attention from them. I actually wrote in my Amazing Spider-Man 2 review that the studio is writing the movies more, but confusing this with making them bigger. X-Men knows that; it writes many characters, but leaves some thiny loose ends just in case, while clearly closing and advancing on story. I felt this movie accomplished what it wanted to tell, and correctly leaved something for later.

The writing is all right, but what about the cast? Patrick Stewart? Ian McKellen? I don't care about the rest of the cast, with these two, I'm sold. But to be fair, Hugh Jackman, Halle Berry, James Marsden and Famke Janssen do a great job, and they seem to have fun together. Rebecca Romjin I do remember, but that's because of dat body and bewbs in blue, and being a bit of a kick-ass femme fatale. The others, Ray Park and Tyler Mane where forgettable, I even remember Stan Lee as the Hotdog vendor more than these two douches. But that's a total of 91% of the cast done right, so, I'm still sold.

Action scenes, events and special effects are good, but my problem with the technical aspects comes from the music. I'm sure Michael Kamen had done a lot of good music, but here, his music was forgettable. And also some powerful scenes are depleted of its power because Kamen's music doesn't fit or doesn't reach the same level of thrills or adrenaline. Another aspect is that, while the events happening in the movie are good, sometimes I felt they are a bit slow or not as energetic as they should be. Another problem is that the climax with Wolverine trying to destroy the machine was a bit too over-the-top, even for X-Men levels.

But overall, X-Men got better as far as I can remember. Now, I felt I could re-watch this anytime just to enjoy a bit of nostalgia and when comic book movies didn't need to be dark, just fun. Kinda miss those days. A surprisingly well put-together comic book movie and one of the catalysts of the boom of the same.

Godzilla vs. Megaguirus

Laughable to death, it is. Fun or reliable, it isn't. This Millennium series isn't looking good so far, it seems it needs to learn how to execute things well. This Godzilla movie is beyond boring, it's mostly a pain to sit through. It doesn't feature good special effects or memorable monster fights. Not even a memorable new monster!

Megaguirus is one of the most average monsters in the saga, similar to that time in the Showa era when the Godzilla movies where kid-oriented. The monster's special effects are crap for the most part and mostly laughable, but not memorable. The story is pretty standard and mediocre, the characters aren't likeable and Godzilla feels downplayed. I don't know how they can fuck it up so constantly and yet so inconsistently. At least the Heisei series picked the pace in the second movie, but here, it makes it harder to pick. And it was a disappointment, because the movie's opening looked very great and staged an environment, but it disappears after 20 minutes without any sight of Godzilla.

What a mess. This movie makes Godzilla look bad, closer to what Roland Emmerich did with the monster. There are only 4 more movies, and it doesn't look good so far. I hope there's one good movie in this Millennium series.

Godzilla Against Mechagodzilla (Gojira tai Mekagojira)

Wow, this is the first time that I rate two Godzilla films with high ratings in a row! And what a pleasant surprise, because the Millennium series started pretty bad, with the mixed bag Godzilla 2000 and falling even more with Godzilla vs Megaguirus. But then, Godzilla Mothra and King Ghidorah arrived, which was pretty good. And now, we have Godzilla Against Mechagodzilla, which, I have to say, it's not only another one of the best in the series, but also of the entire franchise...and so far, my favorite of all Godzilla films.

I know the first one is cinematically superior, but I found this one to be THE Godzilla film I always imagined. Godzilla fights a monster with great special effects, a quick pace, some non-annoying characters and great music; the perfect formula. Mechagodzilla has always represented a staple-up to the series; every time the Godzilla movies are getting shittier, he always comes back in the movie that makes the saga a lot better. It happened in the Showa series with Godzilla vs Mechagodzilla, then in the Heisei series with Mechagodzilla II and now also in Against Mechagodzilla, and this is after another good movie, Giant Monsters All-Out Attack. Once again, Mechagodzilla is here to prove he can make any Godzilla film awesome.

The story is yet another re-start of the series, taking place after the first movie in 1954 and ignoring any other movie ever. How many times can you reboot the story? Well, now the Japanese are building a robot to fight Godzilla, but this one is different: the Godzilla here is actually the second of its species, as the first one was killed in 1954 (the events of the original Gojira). This new Mechagodzilla is built around the skeleton of the first Godzilla, and also, Japan is using all the maximum technology for this robot, so it all comes down to a big monster fight. The action is the best I've seen in the entire existence of Godzilla since 1954, the monster move more and faster, and we have some interesting story in between. This is the second time I felt a Godzilla movie was treated as a Blockbuster; the first one was in Godzilla vs Biollante. Both are great movies, and I hope the Japanese also continue to make Godzilla films in the future.

This is my favorite of the Godzilla films; it's just what I always imagined Godzilla was. There are only two more movies left to watch, and then, the new 2014 film version. I hope it is good, cause I'm more than prepared for it.

Godzilla: Tokyo S.O.S.

After two incredible movies, Toho delivers something more accessible and less demanding, but entertaining and fun at least. Godzilla Tokyo S.O.S is probably the most simplistic movie of the monster. It practically features painted story and characters, and then delivers nearly an hour of monster fight, flashy effects, destruction and all the series' classic nods, but there's nothing to actually hold them.

The story is lazy: Mothra makes clear that he wants Godzilla's bones back to the sea. Meanwhile, Godzilla returns...and that's it, the rest is fighting and effects. I felt like they used only the first 10 pages of the script, and the rest was storyboarded to choreograph the fight scenes, and they got long in the tooth about it, then they said: here's the movie...pretty lazy. I was kinda disappointed, but not too much, after all, I already had two great Godzilla movies in a row, so I didn't expect to have three this time. Yet it is kinda bothering that they just made this to spend money on special effects and just follow the contract of making a Godzilla movie every year. Well, the movie is a huge monster madness and that makes it highly entertaining and fun to watch.

Tokyo S.O.S it's just OK, adds nothing new but we have Godzilla vs Mechagodzilla again, and that is always pleasant. Because it's very simple, there's really not much to say about this one. It isn't special, but it doesn't hurt to give it a watch. Not on the best of the franchise, but neither on the worst, plain and simple. Just one more, one more movie to end it all. See ya at the Final Wars.

Ong Bak 3
Ong Bak 3(2011)
½

Having some free time to spend, I decided to get Ong Bak 3 a heavy re-watch, since the first time I watched it, I yawned so much I got sleep during the movie's third act. But who can blame me? Who can blame anyone that got bored or annoyed watching this lackluster Thai action movie? Let's do a quick recap on the previous two movies:

The first Ong Bak didn't have the best story ever, but the action scenes where the movie's big highlight, relying on hidden trampolines and camera techniques to make them happen, no computers or wire work, pure physical effects. That glued the movie together all the way; every single action scene had something new or more impressive to show. The second movie was different, taking place way before the first movie. It was darker and gorier, but just as entertaining, even if it wasn't as good: the story wasn't told well and the ending was too much show and little satisfaction. It was good nevertheless, and very watchable. With that said, let's dive into the big diarrhea sea that is Ong Bak 3.

The story, much like the first movie, is thin, but they have the balls to give it an inconsistent rhythm and pacing, with too much and yet nothing happening. There's no real character; either hero or villain, it doesn't matter; it goes without glory or attention. The movie makes the first use in the decaying trilogy of computers and wires, which disappoint a lot and the computer effects, are awful. That's degrading the saga guys...sad. The action scenes, while well-choreographed and entertaining (plus, fun) they felt empty without any character to care who's fighting who. Movies like Michael Bay's Transformers films, even those at least "establish" a character (even if it goes undeveloped) before having him fight something. Here, there's none of that, so we're just watching two figures punching each other, without really caring who wins or lose; all we can care about is getting the fuck off wherever we're watching this.

The first two movies leaved something in me, this one only gave me dreams, cause I could barely stand the movie's pacing, lack of energy and character, boring me. If you haven't watch this, well, it goes without saying that you shouldn't. Instead enjoy the enjoyable action fests that are the first and second movies. At least those two should provide some good memories of bone-breaking. Ong Bak 3 it's just deplorable and despicable...me.

Godzilla, Mothra and King Ghidorah - Giant Monsters All-Out Attack
½

The Millennium series seemed almost impossible to get a Godzilla movie done right after how mixed the first one in 1999 turned out, and the mediocrely executed Godzilla vs Megaguirus didn't help at all. But this new Godzilla film is so good, that it makes it look easier to do so. Godzilla, Mothra and King Ghidorah is not only the best film in the Millennium series so far, but is also one of the best Godzilla films of all time. Featuring plenty of monster action, some actual character development, back-to-the-roots Godzilla and even an analysis on the meaning of the monster's existence, this one succeeds on almost every level a Godzilla movie can succeed.

The story is yet another re-start of the monster, taking place after the first movie in 1954 and ignoring any other movie after it. The lost souls of soldiers at World War II possess Godzilla's body and returns to rampage through Japan. Apparently it all has a meaning, but in the meantime, more monsters (known as Guardians) also rise up from thousand or even millions of years of sleep to protect us from the destruction of Godzilla. It all build-up to the greatest monster match seen in the saga, and of course, that guarantees an almost indestructible Godzilla and a lot of Special Effects that finally, aren't laughable.

I liked how the movie gives an interesting build-up to all this monster rising around the world, and in the meantime, we get some character development from human characters. It's not very complex, but it's admirable for a monster movie, where usually the human characters are just there to hold the action until certain time. The analysis they tell about the meaning of Godzilla was pretty good, it has some existentialism about it and even mystery, taking elements from the horrors of war and the fact that we mostly forget tragedies instead of learning from them. Sure, it's only a build-up to mindless monster action, but it's a good build-up to such a basic instinct for destruction.

The action and the special effects are incredible, and even the attention during those scenes: we see people struggling for escape or survive; some of them even get crushed either by the monsters or debris caused by the same. Overall, it covers new grounds for Godzilla while offering the best of what the saga had already gave us since 1954. It's a great combination and I like it. Godzilla, Mothra and King Ghidorah injects new life to the Millennium saga, and I hope the next 3 films are just as good or at least, reach the standard set by this. One of the best Godzilla films.

Taken 2
Taken 2(2012)

Liam Neeson was not one of my favorite stars. My first time seeing him was in Star Wars Episode I, and he was largely forgettable, except when his character died. After that, he appeared in several other movies, but none to catch my attention. It wasn't until 2008's Taken when I suddenly became a fan of him. Since then, he has always represented a huge relief in almost every movie he appears in. When I heard there was a Taken sequel in the works, I got excited, cause Liam Neeson would be back kickin' some serious ass. Unfortunately, Taken 2 it's just an average action movie with no new stuff and wreckless action scenes.

The story is simple: Bryan's ex-wife is captured by the fathers of those that Bryan killed in the first movie. The rest is pretty much the same of what we saw in 2008: Bryan finds out, Bryan kicks asses and Bryan triumphs. The same plot with a different woman, but without the same pacing; this one simply has long "happening" scenes without any story being developed from them or in the meantime. While the concept is the same, the execution is not. This time, Bryan and his daughter (again played by Maggie Grace from the first film) do a kind-of team up in the movie's second act, and while it gets interesting, it isn't AS interesting as the sequences from the first movie, and even so, this act is preceded by a "seen-it" first act and followed by a "seen-it" third act; pretty much caught in-between like a sandwich, one that doesn't taste good. Liam is still as reliable as ever nevertheless.

But that's another problem: his character kicks several asses, but all in action scenes shot by people who can't make the camera stand still for even one second, in scenarios selected by people that don't know a thing about good lighting. The action scenes are composed by a lot of quick cuts, close-ups and shaky cam, all in a murky lighting for the most part, making everything barely understandable; God helps us if we watch it on Fullscreen version. And it doesn't help that those scenes are accompanied by forgettable musical score by Nathaniel Méchaly, where the most calmed clues are played during the action scenes and the more up-beat clues are played during the dialogue or sneaking-around scenes; the film is just a huge mash-up of wrecked action scenes and thin story. Shameful composition.

Taken 2 borrows from the first movie but never manages to be as enjoyable. The first one was fun and exhilarating, this one it's just an average action flick. It may entertain some; it even got me, but never all the way, just some jumpy moments. Take note: Taken 2 is crap, and not even Liam Neeson and his kickin' ass abilities can save it, or find it, or kill it.

This Means War
½

I thought that an action movie starring Kirk from Star Trek and Bane from the Dark Knight Rises would have been a lot better. While these two are game, unfortunately they face a movie where literally, nothing aside from their chemistry and decent action scenes is good. This Means War promotes a romance-action flick and doesn't get the job done in any of those fields. When you watch this, you're in for bad jokes, unfunny comedy, head-scratching editing and an unbalanced fare of any kind of movie genre ever existent.

Chris Pine and Tom Hardy are tolerable, and they seem to have fun on-camera, but the rest of the "characters", dare I call them that, are simply bad, dreadful and even annoying. The girl isn't charming enough to worth all this trouble or plot. Reese Witherspoon is a great actress, but her character here is simply annoying and unreliable, representing a really bad characterization of any kind of woman from any kind of era. Chelsea...oh my God, she SHOULD be a lot of fun, but the script out-of-fun gives her nothing to work with except stereotypical, predictable, stupid, bad sexual jokes. What. A. Waste. The villain was nowhere to be seen, the editing is questionable, the story is unbalanced and doesn't qualify as an action flick or as a romantic comedy, because: while the action is cool, it's short, fastly edited, loud and barley present; the romance is awful and the comedy isn't there, just isn't there, there is no comedy AT ALL.

This should have been cool, or at least, a guilty pleasure, but This Means War really meant shit. It has some good elements, but are mostly absent to have anything truly remarkable. It's ultimately a bad movie, a really bad one, but at least you can simply forget about it the next day, almost as if you've never watched it. This (Movie) Means Crap.

Godzilla 2000
½

Cheesy fun? More like a misfire actually. After the disastrous American Film "Godzilla" (by I-don't-care-about-story director Roland Emmerich), Toho did a quick retaliation on the monster merely one year after. The result is a mixed bag, that takes the King of Monsters back with a cool new design and some disappointingly executed CGI and Blue screen effects...still, it is a lot better than Roland Emmerich's shitty version.

Godzilla comes back, but that's not all, a UFO also comes back and has some sinister plans for us. What are those? Destruction, what else, and also use Godzilla's cells to create a monster of their own, resulting in Orga, the new monster that Godzilla battles here. It's surprising that they have Godzilla fighting a monster in the first of a new series; usually he's solo on those. However, the battles are disappointingly slow and they never feel compelling or uplifting. The special effects on miniatures and costumes are still good, but the blue screen and CGI sucks balls, making the film look inconsistent and worse. The story gets a little heavy on the UFO, and Godzilla appears for a total of 40 minutes I would say. It all comes to a half-boring half-entertaining movie, but if you're looking for something to forget Roland's take on the monster, this might be your movie, but you can't expect the best of the best.

This is the first on the Millennium series, and it starts weak. It has some cheesy effects and some entertaining moments, but overall, I was expecting something far more fun to watch; it is a fact I won't come back to see this film any time soon. It wasn't awful, but it didn't reach my expectations. You have 1 hour and 47 minutes to spear? Here you can use them.

Godzilla
Godzilla(1998)
½

Ahh, America...once again being disrespectful and even insulting the Japanese culture. Why give this kind of movie to someone like Roland Emmerich to direct? He's like another Michael Bay: stale characters and nothing but shit getting destroyed. And the results speak for themselves. This American version of The King of Monsters is pure underwhelming stuff, with bad CGI, bland characters, lack of credibility, plot holes, ass-penis pacing and even average acting. Great elements to do a monster movie, right?

The build-up is not interesting, the story has not that many interesting moments, Godzilla is treated with no sense of wonder or any sense at all, actually. It also lacks that nuclear weapon message that made the original stand-out; instead...it simply shows Godzilla being both fasty & effective, and incompetent and slow. Seriously, it can destroy ships, helicopters, and buildings, but not a single car! Also, it's defeated by some missiles...so, it can survive a nuclear explosion, but not some missiles that didn't even pierce him or blow him to shreds? They did it, they made this monster even less credible. It simply doesn't live up to nothing. The sequences are entertaining and even provoking, but after they end, they feel empty and lackluster. Like every Emmerich movie, it's dumb, inconsistent, stupid and average to the end. Well, it didn't dissapoint there.

I really hope this year's new version does justice to the King of Monsters. It shouldn't be hard, the least it needs to be is entertaining, and that is where this movie failed. It's just bad and underwhelming, and even overlong. It rips-off almost every single movie save any of the Godzilla movies, and they are a lot! Avoid this crappy version of the monster. Yeah, a computer-generated monster is worse than the rubber-ish suit one.

Godzilla Vs. Destroyah
½

After having the Heisei series running for 10 years (and closer to Godzilla's 40th anniversary), Toho decided to end the series before it could get silly and overlong, like the Showa series. Also, they needed to make way for an American production (which was made, it's known as Roland Emmerich's Godzilla film in 1998. Great sacrifice, eh?), so I guess our loss is their gain. Godzilla's heart is about to explode, and seeing how that's a nuclear heart, it's a pretty big deal. Japan must figure out a way to stop Godzilla, and they do: the same weapon they used against him back in 1954. You know what that means? Cameos and nostalgic references, but also a cool-ass monster to give this a proper ending.

The characters do have some weight in the story here, but don't expect much development aside from establishment. The story actually keeps you interested, literally like a bomb that can explode at any second. The special effects are great, but the editing sometimes is sporadic. There's a lot of monster action, needless to say that the new monster (Destroyah) is pretty bad-ass. Surprisingly, the movie manages to develop some emotional scenes that work in a similar (yet not equal) way to those of the original Godzilla in 1954. I was kinda moved when the King of Monsters melted to death. Plus, the ending, while lacking some correct pacing, still works as a sweet good-bye to the Godzilla franchise, at least for a while before returning in 1999, but we'll get to that next time.

This was a good addition to the franchise and a good ending. It has its flaws, but there's enough good stuff to overweight such detractors. This ends the Heisei series of Godzilla films, and that leaves only six more movies to watch before the new one arrives. I hope that Gareth Edwards did great in his Godzilla film, because I will be 1000% prepared for it. See ya in the Millennium series of Godzilla films, the last one so far.

Gojira VS Supesugojira (Godzilla vs. Space Godzilla)

A pretty decent entry in the Heisei series, but not without its notable flaws. Godzilla cells have spread through space (aftermath of his previous battles in the previous movies) and they have felt into a black hole, mutating into a SpaceGodzilla. Relentless and powerful, SpaceGodzilla arrives on Earth and is ready to take us back to the Stone Age and far behind it. Simple story, but it's unevenly paced and executed.

The battle scenes are spectacular, and the final battle is long, but it gets tiring after 10 MINUTES! The characters went undeveloped (you can barely know their names) and Baby Godzilla (highly marketed and cuter than ever) is underused. We also have a new machine, Mogera, a MechaGodzilla wanna-be that also has a few action scenes here and there. Not a very attracting monster, but a fine addition. The stellar new monster (SpaceGodzilla) is actually a pretty good monster: it's powerful, rude and nearly unstoppable. Great stuff. The music is forgettable and lacks the Godzilla theme by Akir aIfukube. I know, a lot of Godzilla movies never use it, but the Heisei series where constant on this. Well, not anymore it seems. But we have some crisp special effects and entertainment to pleasure your interior 10 year old.

This is a fine addition, but nowhere near the best of the series. If you want to spend some nearly 2 hours of your time, this is a very accessible movie to do so. Just don't expect the best monster movie ever.

Godzilla Vs Mechagodzilla II (Gojira VS Mekagojira)
½

The Heisei Series continue with another spectacular and story-lacking Godzilla movie, one that's watchable, likeable and re-watchable. While is not my favorite, I have to recognize this film was way better than the previous one. Toho resurrected King Ghidorah, and then Mothra. Now it's time for MechaGodzilla, and not only that, but also Rodan and Minilla!...OK, that last one was shit in the original but here it gets a decent re-representation. The movie is good in the technical and spectacle department, but the story and characters are left in the Japanese cutting room. Still, with some great monster come-backs and great-multiple action scenes, this movie delivers a great relief.

Pretty much the only problems are the simplistic story and the undeveloped characters, that's a big deal...if this was a Christopher Nolan movie, but this is a kaiju Godzilla film, so all it has to do is entertain all the way, we just don't have to take it seriously after the first movie back in 1954. So let's make it clear: this movie is huge fun even if it fails on storytelling. With that, let's talk a bit about the monsters making the return (other than Godzilla):

MechaGodzilla was the villain in its original debut, but here, he's the hero. Something I like about the Heisei series so far is that Godzilla is still the villain instead of the hero. For the least, he's an anti-hero, defending our existence at times and destroying us most of the time. Great stuff. Rodan; he's a classic Godzilla returner. While he isn't the best monster ever, he gets to have a couple of good fights here, and has some nostalgic factor about it. Needless to say, it looks better than ever before. And now, Minilla (or simply "Baby"). The original son of Godzilla had a shitty design, specially made for children...some "weird" children in that case. Here, he gets a total reboot and his design is cooler than the original. It still seems kid-friendly, but I guess we all look like that when where, well, kids. Also he is merely an emotional drive, not an excuse to tone down the rating, cause there's still some blood here and there. Great refreshing of such shitty monster.

Godzilla vs MechaGodzilla II is a pretty good entry in the series, and makes the Heisei series look good so far. I wish they keep this rhythm for some time, but maybe I shouldn't expect a lot, because there are only 2 more movies left from the Heisei series before getting into the Millennium series, the last one of Godzilla, composed of six more movies. That makes it 8 movies left to watch before this year's Godzilla get released. I'm close, and I can't wait to be fully prepared for the new American version.

Godzilla and Mothra: The Battle for Earth (Gojira vs. Mosura)
½

I realized I'm not a Mothra fan. I can't care about a space-moth that uses Cosmic twins as partners. Godzilla vs Mothra is just an "out-there" monster movie with nothing great in particular, nothing attaching or exhilarating. The execution feels tired and it doesn't feel good for the most. We have monster battles, yes, but there's got to be something in between at least.

I liked the battle of Godzilla and Battra in the sea, that was huge fun spectacle, but the final battle feels stale. It's because both Mothra and Battra don't have much movement. They stay in the same position and throw things, and that's pretty much it. These things can't hold against a moving and living Godzilla. These problems also happened in Mothra vs Godzilla from the Showa era in the 60's. Mothra isn't the monster for fighting, at least not against a monster like Godzilla. Mothra just isn't my kind of monster; it takes some charm away because they have to put some ridiculous stuff, even for Godzilla standards. I felt Godzilla was just a supporting role here, the movie is mostly centered in Mothra, and seeing how I think it isn't a great monster, then I was, for the most part, indifferent to the movie. It's not awful, but Mothra can't hold a Godzilla movie.

This is a middling entry in the series. It gets some spots right, but the overall outcome is unsatisfying. I wonder where the effort of Godzilla vs Biollante was left; probably in the cutting room. I hope the next one is better, or else this will mark the second time Godzilla falls into years of depressingly decaying movies.

Godzilla vs. King Ghidorah (Gojira tai Kingu Gidorâ)

I can't say it's my favorite, but this is a Godzilla movie that has everything: Godzilla fighting a monster twice, it also destroys the city, a simple but compelling plot, destruction, its greatest arch-nemesis, a robotic version of it, sci-fi, space stuff, time travel; Jesus, this has everything.

I love how the plot just got complicated: guys from the 23rd century say Godzilla needs to be destroyed because it will destroy nuclear bases and desolate Japan entirely. To do that, they travel back at 1944 to remove the Dinosaur that will become Godzilla, and replace it with three little cute creatures that are affected by the H-Bomb. It happens, and turns out it was all a plan from the 23rd century bastards to use Ghidorah (the three little creatures mutated by the Bomb) and get rid of Godzilla. But the Dinosaur was affected by "modern" nuclear tests and now it's a new Godzilla, bigger and angrier. They use him to destroy Ghidorah, and he does, but now they have to get rid of Godzilla because it's destroying Japan, and to do that, they time-travel to the 23rd century to revive Ghidorah and get him to the 20th century to fight Godzilla OK they really wrecked this up. It's laughable, but it offers plenty of monster action and entertainment, something all seeks in a Godzilla movie, or any other monster movie. It was good, but I didn't like the fact that it's lighter than Godzilla vs Biollante. I liked its more serious tone and this one lost it when they introduce time travel. It's like a remake of The Space Monster, one of the movies from the Showa era of Godzilla movies; both use sci-fi and Ghidorah all together. I would give it 65%, but I prefer to stick to the 10 by 10 rule of this site.

Godzilla vs King Ghidorah nevertheless, delivers. It has all the elements to work and entertain, even if it doesn't reach the standard set by Godzilla vs Biollante.

Godzilla vs. Biollante
½

Finally, FINALLY! A truly worthy Godzilla film after a long time. The Godzilla saga is a huge pile of hit & miss films, with only two of them being really great films. But with Godzilla vs Biollante, now it makes three. Godzilla has had a good rest during this time: he got a near 10 year rest before returning in 1984, but that movie was pretty boring, and he rested yet another 5 years. This movie was released in 1989, and they finally decided to invert the time in thinking good ideas. Godzilla vs Biollante is one of the better Godzilla movies.

Godzilla has awakened, and some of his cells (spawn from his return to Tokyo in the previous film) have been fused by a scientist with a plant...what a dumb idea. This of course, causes the birth of Biollante. It all comes down to a fight between the two monsters, the struggle of the humans to stop Godzilla, and a decent reflection on wither is it the monsters or the humans the ones that cause all this. Since the first movie in 1954, a reflection was never addressed, and while this one isn't as touching, it is still pretty satisfying to see them giving it a shot. We also have the requisite monster fights and action, and needless to say (but I'm still going to anyway) the special effects of this movie are so far the best in the entire Godzilla's existence. The miniatures look great, the Godzilla suit looks great, the final form of the monster Biollante is also pretty cool (and even fascinatedly strange) and the special effects such as powers and other stuff is also well done. This is the first time I felt they wanted this to have the quality of a blockbuster, and I love it. The first movie is still the king, but this one comes in a close second.

I really had fun watching Godzilla vs Biollante. This is Godzilla's 17th film, but only the second in the Heisei series. In that case, this might be an example of a superior sequel, because this movie is a hell of a lot better than 1984's Godzilla. Faster, more entertaining and more carefully done, Godzilla vs Biollante is a movie that even those not familiar at all with Godzilla can enjoy. A entertaining and satisfying kaiju film.

Godzilla 1985
½

Godzilla got a near 10 year rest after the financial disappointment of Terror of Godzilla in 1975. It was the perfect time to bring him back: people missed him, fans missed him, the possibilities of special effects were bigger, more budget was putted into it, it was Godzilla's 30th anniversary and it was about time to bring the monster back to its villainous and serious days. Unfortunately, they seem to forget that it also has to be entertaining. Godzilla (or The Return of Godzilla) has a thin story, forgettable and average characters, lackluster monster action and a surprisingly boring affair. Why?

First of all, having to wait so many years for a lackluster movie is already a pretty big fuck-up. It's like waiting for the new arrival of Jesus and end up in Hell, whether you were a good person or not. It's like waiting for Christmas having your gift being underwear easily found in the 99 cent store. It pisses you off and it's an unbelievable waste of time. My main problem here was that Godzilla moves slow and didn't destroy as much shit like he used to. This movie replaces all the events from Godzilla Raids Again (the first sequel) to Terror of Mechagodzilla, and acts as a direct sequel to the original. Well, that's a shame, since this is a pretty disappointing sequel, very underwhelming and not as entertaining as it should be. What are the chances!

Godzilla from 1984 is simply forgettable and barely entertaining. Lots of shit get blowed up, but that's mostly at the very last third and the very last 10 minutes of it. It's just a bad movie, but at least not awful, after all, it does have a similar tone to the original, and it got rid of the over-the-top factor of most of the sequels. Still, not a worthy Godzilla movie. A disappointing start for the Heisei era of Godzilla.

Terror of Mechagodzilla

My expectations for this were high after how good Godzilla vs Mechagodzilla turned out to be. It was the first movie since God of Godzilla to be actually re-watchable and fun. Guess I was a bit too overhyped. Terror of Mechagodzilla is a step down and it's a bit of an underwhelming good-bye for the Showa series.

This film takes its huge time to get started. Godzilla appears until the third act, the fight at the end is slow at first (but it gets better as it goes on), the human characters got too much story, and is not entirely interesting. It's not the worst Godzilla film, but there's barely anything into it. I felt it was short, but still lasted a while before getting entertaining. The other monster (Titanosauraus) is a half-baked Godzilla look-a-like and feels to be there just for filler. What else can I say? It wasn't awful; it was just boring for the most part.

For the least, it isn't awful, just boring until the very last third. It lacked any kind of story structure and correct pacing, something that the previous film succeeded to do. It was a letdown, but sure, I'll come back to see that final battle again. It gets interesting and entertaining, but it's the least I can say. Underwhelming kaiju film.

Godzilla Vs Mechagodzilla
½

This is Godzilla's 14th movie and kind of a 20th anniversary special too. The first movie was great, but its 12 sequels just never got most of the spots right. They lacked a constant narrative and pacing, and most of them put the battle until the very end. However, Godzilla vs Mechagodzilla decided to cut all this shit and bring an actually very watchable Godzilla film, with just enough action, characters and lack of stock footage for the good of the overall quality. Since Son of Godzilla, the dark and serious monster became a children's hero, and the quality of the movies started to fall down. Mechagodzilla is actual effort put into a film, and hands down of the better Godzilla films.

First of all, there's more action than other Godzilla films here, both monster vs monster and even humans fighting, doing some sloppy karate fights, but still entertaining at its best. The characters are nothing special, but they manage to develop some kind of connection at least, they're nothing great, but nothing awful either. The special effects and editing got better. The Mechagodzilla monster gives a lot of colorful powers and they help the movie and the action scenes, and they finally, AT LAST, they ultimately stop using stock footage for the fight scenes and monster scenes! The story also has a quicker pacing than previous films, and while still pretty standard, it's a lot better than previous entries. The fight scenes even get intense at some point, hell, we see Godzilla bleed! That's some upgrade right there. I really enjoyed this film.

In pure cinematic terms, this is just another kaiju film, but in pure Godzilla's terms, it's one of the best in the overall saga, both in the Showa series and all the series overall. Finally, a worthy Godzilla film after way too many "miss-it" entries. Believe it or not, this is only the second Godzilla film that I rate with a 70% (3.5 stars), the highest I've given so far to a Godzilla film, the first one being Gojira, the very first movie. Maybe the overall saga of Godzilla is hit and miss, but I still have 15 more Godzilla films to watch, and I'm practically in the final line of the Showa series, so only time will tell. We'll see if I can finish this before this year's new Godzilla film.

Godzilla vs. Megalon
½

A lot better than expected, and fairly more entertaining than previous family-friendly Godzilla films. Still, it has many weak spots, and mostly the only things it fulfills are action and entertainment, the rest in cinematic terms, is pure bullshit.

The film lacks a stable story and characters to hold up until the monsters. Characters suck, they're forgettable, they do nothing special and they're simply out-there things. The story is weak and it's full of clichés, even for 1973. Most of the species and monsters look like jokes, especially Jet Jaguar. It fights well, but it's just laughable, even though that's part of the fun, it shouldn't be part of the character, if it had any. Godzilla is still fun, but the other monsters have a forced design and cut-off powers. Speaking of cut-offs, the movie uses a lot of stock-footage, which is getting old and tiring. Since Son of Godzilla, the editing and overall quality of the Godzilla films have met a fall, feeling like independent films instead of those made by a studio. The poster even promotes Godzilla fighting Megalon ¡In the top of the World Trade Center! Needless to say that never happens in the movie, not even one scene happens in America. Even the American versions can't do anything to fix these movies problems.

It's getting difficult to go through all the Godzilla films like this, with reliance on stock-footage over new scenes, recycled ideas and plots, and overly repetitive affair. This movie was easier to go along, unlike films like Godzilla's Revenge or vs Gigan, but I still can't help but feel empty and incomplete watching these more kid-friendly monster films. Something tells me this somehow will get better, after all, Godzilla had 29 films, and this is only the 13th. If it got that far, that means there's got to be a good Godzilla movie again there. I hope I get there fast...
Let's say this: this movie is huge fun at least.

Godzilla Vs Gigan 1972

It's not the worst Godzilla film (hands down, that's got to be Godzilla's Revenge), but it's still a huge pile of dumped shit. The movie takes long before really get started, and when it does, it's a lackluster fest of stock-footage overdose and slow-stale fight scenes. The monster (Gigan) can look all the cool it wants, but when there's no correct execution, it simply doesn't work.

We have that uninteresting human story which should've disappear after the monsters arrived, but no, we see a lot of it. Not even Godzilla looks interesting anymore; you can even see that the rubber-suit is starting to fall apart. Stock footage is at hand, and takes a lot of the sequences, damn, will they ever stop? The movie has the biggest sin of a Godzilla movie: it's so boring that there's nothing, really nothing into it. It's an empty waste of time and half of your mind gets lost during the story, because there's just nothing to catch any attention here, it's just a bore, huge bore.

Since Son of Godzilla (except for Destroy All Monsters), this saga had shitty movie after shitty movie. My sad guess is that the rest of the movies in the Showa series are pure shit before the Heisei Series, which brought back Godzilla to a more appropriate affair. How sad, we're in Godzilla's darkest times.

Godzilla Vs Hedorah (Gojira tai Hedorâ) (Godzilla vs. the Smog Monster)
½

And now Godzilla does the pollution message...God, will they ever stop? This is another creepy Godzilla movie targeted for weird kids. We literally see a lot of educational things like galaxies, animated segments and shit, it just doesn't add up. Maybe I'm in the darkest times of Godzilla, none of these films since Son of Godzilla feels natural, except for Destroy All Monsters.

This is just weird. The monster is created from pollution, and it attacks with dumps and other shit (literally speaking). There's also all these strange scenes that seems to have come out of a drug-inducing sequence. This film is easy to sum up: it's not fun. Godzilla does fight, but the fights are kinda crappy or very slow, resulting in annoyance instead of fun. The final fight I swear, lasted like half an hour, and none of those minutes are fun; it's just a crappy fight scene that goes on and on and on, forever. There's even one scene where Godzilla flies...something you see everyday, I guess. This film is just nothing reliable, nothing fun, nothing good.

It's the first Godzilla film since the first one that delivers a message. The first movie had postwar, this one has pollution, but it's not well executed, and falls into boredom. This is another Godzilla film you can safely skip; it adds nothing and feels like nothing. Too bad I sacrificed an hour and a half of my life to tell you this.

Godzilla's Revenge

The absolute worst of Godzilla. This film is nothing but an overuse of stock footage from previous Godzilla films and a shitty storyline as a dreadful excuse for a children's film. Let's get this straight: this film will amuse kids, but there's no more public after that, purely on kids, and even better for mentally retarded ones.

The film literally extracts the fight scenes from Son of Godzilla and Godzilla vs the Sea Monster and uses it to fill 60& of the runtime (and it's only an hour and 9 minutes long overall), and the other 40% is a crappy storyline involving a kid called Ichiro. The use of stock footage makes the film to have an inconsistent visual threat, as Godzilla looks different in the two movies where the stock footage comes from, and looks different in the few new footage actually filmed for this shit. The new monster looks like shit and it's crap. From a movie that had a subtle postwar message, Godzilla's Revenge was spawn. The title itself doesn't make any sense, Godzilla doesn't avenge anything. THIS is the lowest point in the Godzilla franchise. To be fair, the stock-footage sequences are entertaining, and even the fight of Godzilla against the new monster (the ONLY new footage of Godzilla in this film) is kinda amusing, but at the end, it doesn't worth and doesn't leave an impression or emotion of any kind, except annoyance.

Even the little kid's story is shit. The message I got out of it is that violence makes a better life. But the real lesson is: AVOID GODZILLA'S REVENGE! It's the rock-bottom of the kaiju film industry and a total waste of time. I never thought I would say this, but I'll rather do my Math class homework. I'll rather do that.

Destroy All Monsters

The intended epic finale of Godzilla is not as...well, epic as it should have been, and even has its false advertisement at hand (not ALL the monsters shown on posters and trailers actually fight), but this was a huge relief for me, after many miss Godzilla movies that never reached any expectation. Destroy All Monsters puts many monsters to fight King Ghidorah...at the last 20 minutes, but it sure worths it, after going through some uncaring human story reaching aliens.

And that's the main problem with Destroy All Monsters: it's mostly the humans trying to reach the aliens in order to take control of all the monsters running loose. While it's not bad, it surely is disappointing. This was, as previously mentioned, supposed to be the final Godzilla film, and for such film, one would expect more of Godzilla in it, but the film gives us not as much as we could hope. However, all the fails are forgiven thanks to the big match at the end, which one can simply skip right into it and avoid the non-Godzilla story.

Destroy All Monsters is either one of the best Godzilla films or simply one of the good ones, without many responsibilities in characters or story. Even after many films, the first one (Gojira) is still the best. I can safely say, Destroy All Monsters is pretty good, entertaining and kinda satisfying. Check it out, but you may want to jump right into the final fight to avoid any issues.

Son of Godzilla
½

This doesn't feel right. Son of Godzilla was meant for a more family friendly affair, because a monster that destroyed Tokyo and was created from a nuclear weapon surely is the stuff kids are looking for. Seriously, this is like the crappiest Godzilla movie yet. It doesn't look good, it does nothing good, it's just not good.

First of all, Godzilla looks like shit. His eyes seem to be looking at two different sites at the same time, and his role as a "father" in this movie is terrible. It merely teaches kids to be mean to other kids. You know, for kids! Godzilla's son also looks crappy, and all of his scenes are shit, he literally acts like a human baby. Isn't this supposed to be an animal? How come that? He also looks crappy. For what I have gathered of information, the budget for this movie was low in comparison with other Godzilla movies. It surely looks like it, this movie is lackluster. It's the crappiest yet, crappier than King Kong vs Godzilla. To be fair, it's pretty entertaining, but it never feels compelling, it never feels like something that was worth the time. Godzilla first played volleyball, then he danced in space, and now he has fall down to its Batman & Robin-ish movie.

So far, it's the worst of the Godzilla movies, maybe a bit worse than Roland Emmerich's 1998 movie, but as close like a fly's wing to be it. The seriousness of the first movie has disappeared completely. But at least the damage wasn't that bad, as the saga still continues until today. Guess Godzilla is so powerful that a crappy movie about his son isn't enough to destroy him.

Godzilla vs. the Sea Monster

An easily skipable entry in the series. Godzilla vs the Sea Monster was OK, but maybe it just isn't the kind of movie you'll come back to see. It doesn't deliver many memorable moments, it barely goes anywhere from an island and Godzilla really takes its time to actually do something (almost an hour into the movie, with only 27 minutes left before it ends). But to be fair, it somehow wasn't boring.

I can't tell why, maybe the elements were just adequate. How's the story? OK. How's the fighting of monsters? OK. How are the characters? OK. This movie delivers just the right amount of elements to be OK, but fails in being memorable. From all the Godzilla entries, this one is the very first one I can classify as "forgettable and forgivable". It does nothing new, but doesn't do anything bad either. If you're looking for a time killer, this is the "adequate" movie to the job. Otherwise, it's just an out-there movie. Nothing great, nothing bad, just...adequate.

I never yawned or anything, but I also never got excited. There are some good moments, but nothing really remarkable. For what it was, it's fine, but we rather skip it. The most adequate movie ever.

Godzilla Vs. Monster Zero

Godzilla takes sci-fi now, and the result is...pretty hit and miss. I don't know if it's a bad movie or not, because it gets the job done but I didn't feel it was all it could be. My problem comes from one thing: Godzilla is barely there in the first two acts. Yeah, it's a Godzilla movie with 50% of actual Godzilla in it. The other 50% is just the sci-fi and the story. While it's not boring and certainly a lot better than expected, the issues are a bit too present to fully enjoy it.

Like I said, Godzilla is working part-time in this movie. In the first act, he only appears for three minutes more or less to fight along with Rodan, the Monster Zero which turns out to be Ghidorah...in space! That's some cool stuff there. Godzilla even manages to do a victory dance!...OK, now it's getting ridiculous. Then, the second act pays tribute to the title, because literally, there are Zero Monsters in this act, it's just the human characters and the story. But got to hand it to them, it's still a pretty interesting act. The third act is mostly the monsters doing what they should have been doing this whole time: destroy shit and fight. The fight scenes and the destroying scenes are good, the story is pretty standard, but fine, and even the sci-fi feels kinda fresh. But I felt there was just barely enough Godzilla in this movie, and I really missed him big time on most of the movie. I acknowledge the rest is not bad, but I came here to see The King of Monsters, but I had pretty heavy sci-fi stuff, which is something I didn't come here for. It's like going to Domino's and order a Pizza, but you end up receiving McDonald's Happy Meals, it just doesn't feel right.

However, maybe this movie did more than I could understand; maybe it'll grow on me later, but who knows. It never bored me, the final act was cool and I actually didn't feel empty, but the bad stuff still bothers me. Check it out if you can.

Ghidorah: The Three Headed Monster

Finally a legitimately entertaining Godzilla sequel. A Three Headed Monster? Genius! With some ridiculously funny moments, this movie finally delivers the all-time entertainment Godzilla is known for, and thank God, because they certainly took a while to do it. It's the fifth time we see Godzilla, yet it's not just him destroying shit, actually, that's pretty toned-down here; it's more about Godzilla fighting monsters, and I love it.

The story gets some hold-up build-up while we learn what Ghidorah is, and in the meantime, Godzilla fights Rodan, another kaiju. Godzilla doesn't get along with anybody, huh? It's quite simple, but truly entertaining, it isn't dull and it isn't stale, it's just done correctly to properly entertain. All I have to say is, it quite delivers unlike any Godzilla sequel before it.

Ghidorah would later become a regular villain in the series, and thank God, because that monster is cool and it's a great effect too. This movie certainly lacks characterization and a strong story, but what we have here, it's just about enough. One of the better Godzilla movies.

Mothra vs. Godzilla (Mosura tai Gojira)
½

Not really a big fan of this one. While it is entertaining all the way, Mothra vs Godzilla is mostly dull, even for these standards. Actually, the whole movie is very standard. It does show Godzilla destroying shit and being practically invincible, but it's the fourth time we see him doing this. This is the first time i felt Godzilla had nothing new to show.

In typical fashion, the battle doesn't happen until the last third, but contrary to King Kong vs Godzilla (where the rest is boring and unattaching) what happens in-between is pretty interesting, some build-up there and some development, not just crap. But it plays it safe way too often. The battle is also pretty dull, but it holds up pretty well. The characters are nothing special, but neither bad, just standard characters, fortunately not stale. This is a movie that gets everything done both good and bad, either way it isn't the best Godzilla or one of the best as many declare. If there's someone that can explain me why this is one of their favorites from the King of Monsters, I would be pleased to know. In the meantime, I'll give this movie half the total rating.

It was dull and standard, playing very safely and barely taking any risks. It's nothing new or refreshing; it's just Godzilla doing for the fourth time the same thing. It's not bad, just too simple and average. Mostly a "meeh". Hope the next one is good.

King Kong vs. Godzilla
½

This was lame. It might be the lamest crossover I've seen in a long time. This is lamer than Alien vs. Predator. Yes, they do fight, but only at the very end, the rest is laughable King Kong and blue screen effects, thin plot, ridiculous imagery, ridiculous scenes and a highly rushed ending, though, after all the inconsistencies, I wasn't shocked by the latter. This is just...lame.

Godzilla is entertaining as ever, but King Kong gets all the laughs and none of the thrills. They never really fight until the very last minutes, meanwhile, we see a lot of "nevermind, don't care" scenes and some crappy effects. Yeah, I know this is 1962, but 1933's King Kong and 1954's Godzilla had much better effects and much better execution. Guess they don't really work well together. The overall movie was ridiculous, lame, lackluster and boring. The last minutes were entertaining, but they don't worth the trip. It's laughable for the most part.

This is Godzilla's third movie, and it's already lame. This movie doesn't feel compelling or complementary, just sort-of "out there". They don't act like monsters, they act like wrestlers and fighter-wanna-be's. If you are up to watch it, I recommend you to skip most of the movie and go directly to the part that pays attention to the movie's title. It's just lame and laughable, and it's shouldn't be that way. Preposterous to say the least.

Godzilla Raids Again

An average sequel. It doesn't have any emotional resonance or messages about anything. It's pretty much like this: Godzilla rises again, they stop him. Not much going on at any moment. I wonder how they lost their sense in only one movie. This movie also had a very Americanized version, which sucks balls, so I decided to go with the Japanese original.

The big spotlight here is the first fight of Godzilla with another monster (something that stayed in the rest of the movies). Anguirus appears for only the first half of the movie and he's done after Godzilla kicks his ass. But the fight they have here is long, entertaining, satisfying and hilarious. It's obvious that some of these special effects look bad, but that's part of the fun: it was the best back there. But from the whole movie, that is the only thing I can recall. The rest, it's just forgettable, and I felt totally un-attached to the movie after Anguirus is defeated, and that's the first half of the movie. Nothing like the first Godzilla movie, which was something more than a monster movie. This sequel, IS just a monster movie, nothing else. What a letdown.

While below the original, this movie still represent fun, entertainment and satisfaction in a way. The human characters aren't as boring as in the original, but they aren't anything interesting either. This sequel just lets everyone tired, and I'm struggling trying to write something about this movie. Let's just say, it was unnecessary, and let's forget everything except for that battle of Godzilla and Anguirus where shit gets destroyed pretty well.

Gojira
Gojira(1956)
½

The first movie about the monster of monsters, Gojira A.K.A Godzilla. Seeing how a new movie is coming for 2014, I decided to finally take a look on the film that started it all. Godzilla is not only a movie about a monster destroying shit, but also a not very thoughtful but still effective postwar commentary and the dangers of nuclear weapons, when nature returns the damage back to us in the form of something we involuntarily created.

The special effects are both impressive and, dare I say it, hilarious. They however help create the illusion of a giant monster, so, even for 1954, these are great special effects. The sequences where Godzilla is on-screen are entertaining, especially the famous scene where he shows his power, by destroying Tokyo in a large fun sequence. Let's face it: it's more entertaining than threatening, but it's fine. It's actually more about the postwar commentary and the provoking question of defeating (practically) weapon with weapons, thus creating and endless circle. Strong point there, it seems old cinema used to care more on message than mindless entertainment. So, Godzilla is all fine and well, but, what's really wrong about it? Well, to accompany this movie about a giant monster being the result of nuclear weapons (and thus, resulting in our possible end by it) and the postwar message, we also have a side-story with human characters...AND IT'S A BORING HUMAN STORY!!!
I know they're trying to keep the monster out for some time to reveal the real spectacle, but man, going through the main characters was painful, bothering even. It was OK at the beginning before seeing the monster, but after that, it gets tiring, and the events involving these human characters are nothing interesting. If it was only about the postwar and the monster, it would have been a lot better, but for some reason, they decided that a drama-romantic plot was also necessary...well, it wasn't.

I know it's practically only one fault on an otherwise flawless movie, but that boring human story really affected my experience, it gets really bothering. But ultimately, this movie worths because the rest it's just fine and well. It's still a classic and it's not an average movie, it's a good movie, but heavily affected by a painfully paced, boring drama-romantic sub-plot. The strong and potent beginning of truly, The King of Monsters.

Rocky IV
Rocky IV(1985)
½

War propaganda...Rocky was never meant to be propaganda of any kind. It was the dark and serious tone that life has sometimes. But Rocky IV says "fuck that", and we have what I like to call, the Batman & Robin of the franchise. I'm not talking about being the worst. I'm talking about that movie in almost every single franchise when the concept is downed to pure spectacle, with music from featured artists, lots of colors, overly cheesy and even clichéd; in the end, pure merchandising instead of cinematic greatness. Rocky IV is the Batman & Robin of the franchise.

This is epic, no doubt, but is also a step back in characters. For example, I'm pretty sure that the Apollo of the first three movies would never take a box match as something that much similar to a war between America and Russia. I know this was in the time of the Cold War and all that, but Rocky IS NOT FOR PROPAGANDA. I'm sure that the Adrian from the previous three movies would not say to Rocky that he would not win the match...bullshit; she said in Rocky III that there was nothing to be afraid of, but here, she is a character even below the Adrian from the first Rocky. Also, this is apparently an honor for America...pure bullshit; first, the movie depicts Americans as idiots, thanks to the following: Apollo is molested by Russians just because...they're Russians. Instead of singing the National Anthem, we have James Brown singing Living In America, and last but not least, the American public react hostile when they present Ivan Drago on his match against Apollo. Yep, surely we are a great ass-nation. Remember the seriousness and darkness of the first Rocky? Well, instead of character and story development, we have a huge number of music videos; first, Eye of the Tiger instead of the Rocky Theme, second is Living In America by James Brown, then No Easy Way Out, then Burning Heart, and then Hearts On Fire... is this a long compilation of Rocky music videos? I'm sure it is. Buy another day people.

Stupid, this movie is stupid, but huge, HUUUGEEEE fun. Needless to say I loved this movie, but I just can't stand how low it fall. If you play this and the first Rocky movie back to back, you'll see this isn't the Winning Academy Award icon anymore, this is pure merchandising and useless war propaganda. Ultimately a very memorable film and it has the epicest battle of Rocky's career. Fun, but stupid and terrible.

Jesus of Nazareth

Jesus of Nazareth should have been a long movie, not a 4 epidose mini-series. I say this, because the quality of the sets, cast, crew, extras and musical score belongs to a very expensive epic. This re-telling of Jesus' life and mission has never been made so well, so intriguingly awesome and even to have not-religious public to watch it. This production also adds some new material not present in the bible, but that material fits so well in the story, it's almost impossible to think that THAT wasn't in the Bible. This production is awesome, and surely an unrecognized epic. Watch it if you can, it's superb as a production as well as for religious people, it's a big production, sort of like Ben-Hur or Lawrence of Arabia quality of epic.

WALL-E
WALL-E(2008)

A very wondeful film that combines technology and an environmental message that's subtle. A great piece from Pixar and in my opinion, the greatest that Pixar has done so far. I know, there's the Toy Story trilogy, but i found Wall-E more ambitious. This is a true experience, one i will never forget. What's so special about WALL-E is that the main character is an innocent, lonely and little robot that all it does is cleaning our trashy planet, and yet he's a very charming character. The adventure he live takes a sci-fi feeling and yet we feel the magic. The story is far more complex than what the mind catches at first. It starts in a desolated planet and ends on a fantastic ship were all humans live. The adventure is unique and genuine, and can get to the likes of everyone. A movie that knows what to do with it's powerful material.

Inception
Inception(2010)

This movie proves that Nolan is not your average director filmmaker (i'm talking to you, Ronald Emmerich), he's a director that wants to innovate, and with Inception he surely does. Goes, dare i say, more deeper into deepness than many other movies and offer us something new, nothing clichéd. Nolan, you're the master man, MASTER!

Batman: The Dark Knight Returns, Part 1

The first part of Frank Miller's masterpiece adaptation is hugely satisfying, featuring crisp animation, dark tone, seriousness and a bit of intelligence. The voice cast is also great and it makes you watch Part 2 right off. For all public in general.

Superman (Superman: The Introduction) (The Death Ray) (The Mad Scientist)

Short, but loving every minute of it (and it's only 10 of them). Fleischer's Superman is a superb animated short and one of the best examples of cartoons that works then and today.

Chronicle
Chronicle(2012)
½

Found Footage made big money, and it quickly became old. But movies like this one, shows us that one old genre doesn't have to disappear, but evolve and cover new grounds. Chronicle is a fantastic movie, taking elements such as socialism, bullying, psychology, sci-fi and hand-held camera nod to offer a different, fresh and interesting movie, executing all its ideas well and satisfying.

But that alone couldn't do a good film, so director Josh Trank, doing what a good director does, casted all these talented young people, that instead of singing like pretentious Dinsey "stars", they act incredibly in this new movie. Dane DeHaan is believable as the stereotypical young lad, but with the twist that he gets the power of a God...and that's the interesting thing. Like the title says, it's a chronicle, and it's a great one. The other cast members are also good. Instead of being huge assholes as Holywood always depict teenagers, they are some charming people, that even with all these powers, they act like normal people. Just people, very few movies in history are able to transmit such familiar feelings while also adding things like the ability to fly, move objects, etc. Unbelievable facts become believable with Chronicle.

The movie is also full of greatly executed scenes: the emotional scenes are great, the flying scene is great, the power pranking scenes are fun, the climax is breathtaking; all is great with Chronicle. If I had to point something wrong about it, it would be the pacing at the first half of the movie: it's kinda slow and inconsistent. It isn't until later that it becomes 100% addicting. But still, the movie delivers and quite frankly, I really liked it, it was awesome.

Chronicle is a great movie and if you are planning to see anything new, this is the perfect movie to do so. A movie that knows the correct use of execution.

The Amazing Spider-Man 2
½

Is it better? Yes, it is, but not too much. Does it worth? For once, yes. Spider-Man returns, and now he faces his worst enemies: overcrowded nods and too many plotlines. The first Spidey that tried this (Spider-Man 3) failed big time, but Amazing 2 does a better job in almost every way...yet the result isn't completely satisfying.

All the actors do great, but it's on the character where most of them fall. Jamie Foxx as Electro is great, but the villain is not entirely memorable (typical from Marvel) . Dane Dehaan is great as Harry Osborn, and has some crisp character development. The Green Goblin...looks like Malcolm In The Middle with drugs. And his execution is thin, but effective, for the most part. The action scenes are great, the special effects look weird due to Spidey's new outfit but still awesome, and the story is OK. Nevertheless, there ARE some issues...

First of all, the story tries hard to tell a lot of things. I think we live in an era where the sequels just have to have a lot of story to tell, like the second Hobbit movie, and now this. Maybe they are confusing "make it bigger" with "write it more". Sequels do need to be bigger, but not overcrowded. They need to carry more, but not leave anything out. This movie has an inconsistent narrative; some clumsy events, some clumsy characters and a sense of tell too much and yet leave something for later. It is bothering at times, but for the most part, Amazing 2 delivers.

Character development from Spidey, Gwen, Harry and Electro are at hand, but the other characters are "out-there". The story is convoluted at times, but ultimately enjoyable, and the action scenes are great, and is entertaining and poignant. It is a good Spidey film, but not the best. All my other issues would need spoilers and I don't want to do that to you, so take a guess and give it a chance. Marvel is so far so good with the movies, but cracks are appearing in the armor; maybe they're getting too confident, but please, let's go back for once where all that mattered was crisp heroes with entertaining villains, not very big villains. This movie is good, bigger than the previous film, but it could have been a lot better. Take it for what its worth and enjoy, have fun.

The Blair Witch Project

A very effective terror-horror film, the format of the movie helps the atmosphere a lot and builds itself every time more and more terrifying. It's not for everyone though, as the movie's one dimensional story-telling might bore or bother some people more than horror them.

I have this "theory" that suggest: the really terrifying films are disliked by most of the audiences. Mostly because...well, they do scare. There are films like Alien from Ridley Scott, where we see the monster, although barely and in the dark. There's also Spielberg's Jaws, where the giant shark is kept out of the camera half-the movie, and the other half he's shown without any preparation, and its size was the cherry on the cake. Blair Witch applies a new form: whatever it's the monster or creature, is never ever shown, but cryptic remains or clues of it are there. We don't see the Witch at all, but we do see her actions, and that gives another terrifying power: the imagination. How is she? What is she? How she does all this? Why? It's a huge dilemma. It's purely the unknown, and, as humans, we FEAR the unknown, especially when all we know about it is that it can hurt us, kill us, or even WORSE. It's an ingenious formula, but that's not the only aspect of it.

We also have the perfect location: the woods, in the nowhere, were no one is there to help you, when everything you need is far away, where the darkness is all around once it's the nighttime. And for the worse: it's cursed. You can never get out of there, the more you walk, the more nowhere you're getting. The only places you can found in that loop are creepy areas, both in the day and in the night. Holly shit, that is unbelievable, and surely it's one of the worst places ever. And there, the imagination is at hand yet again: you hear screams and laments at night. What is happening? You'll never know, but you know it's something painful and that gives anybody the creeps!

Also let's look at other things in which this movie succeeds and other found-footage horror films have failed. First, the characters. They're unknowns, so they act like real people, not like dumb horny teenagers, and we identify with their despair at the worst times. I know how hard it is to stay up in the woods, but surely I never got stuck on the middle of the woods and ran for days and days to get to nowhere. It was hard just being there, so imagine how abysmal would it be if all these shit also happen? Sure it can't, but then again, that's what makes this movie work: the imagination. Infinite possibilities, all of them terrifying. All I have to say is: I think it's effective, I can't say that I loved it because it's supposed to be a terrifying experience, and a real one isn't pleasant at all. This one has a combination of both: I love its horror factor, at the same time that made it scary and unpleasant. It was very traumatic for me at first, but in the end, it's just a movie, an experience, not something that should make me shit my pants for the rest of my life.

But no movie is without its flaws. The pacing of this one both helps and hardens the simple thing of sitting through it. It takes patience to enjoy it, and, to be honest, at first I wasn't patient at all. But if I can go through Peter Jackson's three hour epics, and such awful movies like Manos, I can handle this hour and a half horror film. The ending I thought was terrifying and horror-ish, but not everyone will take it the same way, as many would see it as "sporadic" and "rushed". It is hard to gravitate towards it, but personally, this is one of the scariest films I've ever watched. Give it a chance if you haven't see it.

The Lion King

It's been more than a decade since i watched this for the last time. I was a bit afraid that it might not be the masterpiece i remembered. I was a little nit-picking, but The Lion King is still the masterpiece we all remember. What makes this movie an epic? Of course, its size. The ideas and ambitions of this movie are huge in every department: animation, music, characters, story, (based obviously on Hamlet and Macbeth by Shakespeare) characters, songs, etc. It's probably the greatest animated epic. Much like Lawrence of Arabia is considered the epic of epics, we can considerate The Lion King the animated epic of animated epics...if there's any other.

The movie also has Disney's charm all over it, so of course, you can feel the magic on every shot of the movie, and of course, makes it entertaining. Other than magic, the movie manages all kinds of emotions. The opening scenes helps the epic feeling of the movie, the happy scenes are charming, the death of Mufasa delivers the sadness it should, the warm scenes deliver calmed moments; just every emotion into a film with oddly enough no humans what so ever. This is so far my favorite Disney film in classic animation, it's simply an epic movie, and i like epics...plus it was released on my year of birth, so there's a strange connection, and it was Disney's Renaissance climax, before he went down and down with their movies...did i tell you the next one was Pocahontas? ugh. The Lion King, a timeless emotional, depth and epic animated movie.

Hakuna Matata!

HAPPY HOLIDAYS REVIEWS PART 11: The Lion King (1994)

Gamera 2: Assault of the Legion (Gamera 2: Region shurai)

A bit of a step down from the first Gamera in the Heisei series, but still a pretty good movie in some ways. Gamera now faces a huge new menace called the Legion (taken from The Bible, not kidding) which might represent Gamera's greatest face-off yet. How does it hold up?

Certainly the effects are good, and they shine in the right moments. The monster Legion just had to be one of the best designs ever, and to make it better, it's an actual practical effect, no computers to move it. These guys should work on Hollywood and gain respect to physical effects. The story is OK, the characters are OK, the pacing has problems but they're grounded by some entertaining monster action! Speaking of which, there are some good action scenes here and there, but my only complaint is that they get slow sometimes. Needless to say the climax of the final fight was some kind of Deus Ex Machina power blast. There was some charm in the first movie that helped it. It's part of that origin story feeling: it feels good to see the hero rising and showing-off for the first time. No matter how many times we see that cliché, we just can't get tired of it. This one lacks some feeling to it; I felt it was more like a very standard sequel, merely fulfilling my entertainment instincts and not much my emotional instincts. However, the movie packs enough to be a good time killer.

This second Gamera is below the first, but that doesn't mean it's bad, it still represents a good time and a good experience. For what I got, it was OK, but it could have been much more, especially with a monster like Legion and its ambitious-cool design. Take it for what its worth and enjoy yourself.

Dragon Ball Z: Battle Of Gods

Hell yeah, after many years, they're back. And it was worth it. It was good, yeah, it was huge fun, it had some genuine laughs, some great animation, yeah, great, it was good, it was fun...OK, with that out, let's see the issues, cause they are some big issues.

Well, the story is pretty standard, but every DBZ Movie had been, so, there's no problem. The characters are just as charming as ever. The best ones are the villains Bills and Wiss, those two are huge fun and the movie centers on them big time, they're hilarious, and Bills is so far the best DBZ villain, no kidding. The action scenes are great, the humor is good and it's all the good things that Dragon Ball stands for.

Now, the issues: there isn't as much fight as one will expect. Yeah, there's like a total of 3 action scenes in this nearly 2 hour movie. They are great, but Dragon Ball Z is known for their large multiple battles. Second: not ALL characters are useful, sometimes even Vegeta feels downplaced. Third: character like Vegeta and Shenron, known for their imposing attitudes, are ridiculed by Bills. Yeah, that villain is so powerful that even the Prince of Saiyans and the huge-ass Dragon are afraid of him. Vegeta even gets to dance to keep Bills busy! Da fuck? Fourth: The Super Saiyan God is downplayed. It's on-screen for like 5 minutes and it disappears. Huge marketing for such a tiny execution. It's like marketing the Joker in the Dark Knight and have him only for 5 minutes. That'll piss everyone off. And last but not least, it's a bit more comedy than fighting, like the first Dragon Ball series. That's not bad, but this is Z, it has to be what it was on its own, not its predecessor. And what about Goku losing to Bills at the end?...no, I actually didn't have a problem with that, I thought that was the right way to end it, because that would make it predictible, and shows perfectly how powerful Bills is. Also, it wouldn't be the first time Goku loses or gives up. It has happened a lot of times before.

As you can see, this isn't the Dragon Ball Z everyone was expecting, but, is it really bad? No, it certainly isn't. The change of feeling makes this movie a lot fresher, which made the wait worthy, but also ironically troubles it. It is a great DBZ movie, but not the best. This is an experience you will never forget. I watched this movie on theatres in September 2013, in México. It arrived there pretty quick, and I approached it. A huge wave of nostalgia, but fresh.

Son Of God
Son Of God(2014)
½

Often scratches the surface of boredom and pure adequacy in favor of pure auto-pilot Religious affair. Son of God fails to deliver the necessary tone and pace to be a good re-telling of Jesus' life. It's mostly a money-squashier to the faithful and those with some hunger for more The Bible series. I never watched the series, so I think I could get something out of this as a mere critic. There's little to get out of it, at least in the good sense of the word.

It has an inconsistent pacing, some stale acting, some questionable special effects and a Jesus Christ that might be a little too handsome to take serious as the savior of humanity. Diogo Morgado plays an un-attaching Jesus and one that works merely on phrases from the Bible instead of actual dialogue that can be worked out of it. Films like The Passion of the Christ or Jesus of Nazareth does this, having biblical references as a mere basis for dialogue. Many characters went undeveloped and generic, and some of the dialogue is too dramatic and not very engaging. Son of God can't approach the epic tale of Jesus' mission correctly, it's mostly and "out-there" representation that goes fast, but also slow. To be honest, the rest is OK. The cinematography sometimes is crappy but there are some good shots, the overall Passion part is very well done and it does feel like an epic when it needs to. But this is only half the job done.

Son of God moved me at times, but I can't love it or like it because it's too average and dull-ish. The biggest flaw is Diogo Morgado who doesn't take the role as it should, and thus, doesn't deliver a good Jesus, and seeing how this is Jesus' life, it fails on its ambition. It's watchable, but only at times like these, on Easter times. As a faithful I was engaged, but as a member of the audience, I felt indifferent.

Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope

An unstoppable wave of greatness, the first Star Wars film is the most epic space-opera ever crafted by human hands. The adventurous feeling this has is unique, only surpassed by its sequel.

Captain America: The Winter Soldier

A little recall on Marvel's Phase 2: Iron Man 3 wasn't the kind of movie I was expecting, it's was good, but was below my expectations. Thor: The Dark World finally was the kind of movie I was expecting on Phase 2, and it fared better than the first Thor in my opinion. This sequel to Captain America is also the kind of comic book movie I was expecting for Phase 2, it felt more like a true build-up to a great story (Avengers 2), but even so, there are some issues.

First, the good stuff. The story keeps us interested every minute, and there's some very subtle humor here and there, but the overall affair is darker than other Marvel entries. Old characters are as charming as ever and do what they're best in to; while new characters are mostly forgettable, save for one of them: Sam Wilson A.K.A Falcon, he was charming and memorable, and a great side-kick for the most part. The movie is highly action-packed, and features some strong lengthy action scenes, long enough to fulfill our basic instinct for violence, but not enough to feel tired, all results in a balanced pacing and overall execution. The dialogue is also good and adequate, nothing too Dark Knight or Iron Man-ish, but just the right amount of effort.

So, it's clear that the movie is good, but, ¿Is it superior to the first movie? This is a build-up to The Avengers: Age of Ultron, so all it has to do is kill time before it arrives for the least, but it's also a sequel on its own, and it's a number one rule to surpass your prequel. Does The Winter Soldier improves over the first? Let's dive in:

One of the problems of Marvel movies is the villains: they're mostly forgettable. Many of them can hold up, but only during the movie, and after leaving it, we barely recall any of them. In Marvel's cinematic universe, this problem has been constant. In other Marvel's productions, we do have some great villains, like Doc Ock or Magneto, but in Marvel's Avengers line, there's only Loki...that's it. Unfortunately, Winter Soldier also enters on this trope. The villain at first seems interesting, he kicks some serious ass and it's relentless, but after learning the why, it becomes just another guy to fight Cap. The other bad guy it's predictable, other than the Winter Soldier, you can easily guess who's the one plotting it all. Just watch the trailer and it's crystal clear. Marvel really needs to learn how to do villains all the way. While the story is good, it also has those moments when you can guess where are they're going next and what are they going to do, even sometimes what is going to happen. There are some surprises (specially the two after-credits scenes), but it is predictable at times.

Also, I'm kinda tired of flying CG ships and extremely advanced technology. It's not that it's implausible, it's just that we have like 10 movies a year with those elements, and it has been so widely exploited that it's kinda getting old. The last time I remember sci-fi elements doing new stuff, is in movies like Gravity. But Winter Soldier does nothing new or surprising in special effects; don't get me wrong, they are awesome special effects here, but it's nothing really inventive. That'll do it in the bad details, as you can see, very few in comparison with the great stuff. But, ¿is it superior to the first?

Well, that's hard to tell, it depends on each person's point of view. I liked the old feeling of the first movie, and it had some good action scenes too. This sequel is darker and lacks any kind of environment feeling. All Phase 2 movies had some environment to them: Iron Man 3 had an advanced technology-ish feeling; Thor 2 had that medieval semi-epic cosmical-ish feeling. Winter Soldier...yeah, it's just an out there-ish feeling. I don't think I can put the first over this one or this one over the first. I'll just say either way, you'll have fun, big fun.

Winter Soldier delivers what it needs to deliver and then some. Marvel is in good way to go, and this only increases my hype and expectation for Avengers 2, and I'm sure in many fans will do the same. Again, stay after the credits, there are these two awesome scenes which I will not give away, but certainly builds expectation, and it feels good. A great Comic-Book movie.

Gamera: Guardian of the Universe
½

Gamera finally takes a turn for the best, this time, for a more serious way to do things, if you can still take a Giant Turtle that can fly to possibly be any serious. Guardian of the Universe is one of those rare reboots that work, and this is 1995, by that time, this kind of movies were huge bombs both commercially and critically. It does hand some annoying stuff and some corny moments, but the great stuff overcomes all that, making this a worthy movie to spend any weekend.

The story is nothing special, but fills the necessary stuff to make Gamera plausible on its own insane universe. Characters actually make connections with the monster, and even if they are pretty generic, they're never part of the bad aspects of the movie, but they do get most of the corny moments previously mentioned. The special effects have crappy blue-screen, but great physical effects, such as the miniatures which has a huge level of detail and attention to it, making the effects both to show-off and to help, which rarely happens. The fight scenes are entertaining and the overall outcome after watching the movie is satisfying. It's not the best kaiju movie ever, and never reaches Gojira's level of attachment, but certainly becomes a better character that survived its campy moments and resurrected in a more serious and appropriate tone.

Gamera: Guardian of the Universe is entertaining, fulfilling and satisfying, and for that we must feel grateful, after all, it could have been a lot worse. If you are not into monster movies, then Gamera is not for you, but if you are open-minded, this can be a great time-killer. A properly made monster movie.

Breakfast at Tiffany's
½

Generally I'm not into romantic films, even if they're alongside comedy. I too often feel the cheesiness gets out of the screen and bites me, and I become embarrassed and uncomfortable. But I realized that I can get to enjoy them if the cast and characters are likeable and when the comedy is kept subtly, reaching slapstick only when needed. Breakfast at Tiffany's (God knows why the title) is probably my favorite romance film at this point of my life as an on-line critic. I loved the story, I loved the leads, I loved the comedy, I loved the ending, I loved Audrey Hepburn (who wouldn't?) and I loved how misguided are some of the anachronisms.

The best it's the two leads of this romantic comedy: Audrey as Holly and George as Paul. Their romance is cheesy, but likeable. It's subtle, but noted. And of course, both performances are great. I can pretty much list every detail of this movie and I would say I love it, but there are some uncomfortable things there. What's up with the Asian guy there? I thought only Birth of Nation had such offensive and annoying stereotypes. Even if I loved this movie, this kind of genre (romantic movies) isn't my favorite. I'm more for the seriousness or entertainment involving fights or some crisp story taking realistic elements. It's still hard for me to sit through this kind of movies, I don't feel much welcome.

But if it's well-done, then it's great, indifferences aside. It's a fine movie and poignant, and if I enjoyed it even if the genre isn't not my favorite, then this movie did more incredibly than it seems.

Mortal Kombat: Annihilation

I loved the first movie because it felt like the videogame. This one just goes away from the videogame as possible and tries to be a pure action movie. Literally, only action, no story, characters and even less consistency than the first movie.

Mortal Kombat

Video Game-based movies are just never going to be good. At least not in terms of how a movie is made. For me, a "good" Video Game movie adaptation is when the movie delivers the same feeling as when playing the videogame it is based-off. I believe in Stanley Kubrick's phrase: The idea is not about the realism of it, but the feeling of it. Mortal Kombat delivers the same feeling as when playing any of the video-games, except for the gore, but the rest is well-adapted.

The characters are bland and too typical, but so are the ones of the videogame, so it's fine. The movie has a lot of action scenes. Again, just like the videogame, where all you do to progress the thin story is fighting over and over. The atmosphere is good both on terms of a movie and those of adapting the videogame. The special effects are nothing Jurassic Park-ish, but they help the movie, so it's fine. The script makes no sense, there are no rules, no structure or consistency, but the videogame itself also had crappy stories, relying only on back-story, and after that, you just punch the opponents. No more story after that. But the story is also compensable, even if it has poor crafting. You know what the characters want, what they are and why they are, so it's fine. Acting is not great, but neither too horrible. It's just cheesy, but this whole movie is, hell, it's kinda loveable because of that. I just love this movie: it's the videogame I grew up with and the movie I grew up with too. Just what a Mortal Kombat fan wants and none of what a movie critic wants. I'm both, and I'm OK with that.

Mortal Kombat sucks as a movie, but succeeds as an adaptation: it's loyal, shares the same feelings, experiences and satisfaction. Plus, it has that theme song that has always been cool ever since. It does have a great soundtrack, it's loud, preposterous and cheesy, but fun and satisfying for those that love the Mortal Kombat franchise. Otherwise, it's just a standard action movie. The least it can be is a guilty pleasure. So far, the best movie based on a videogame.

Dredd
Dredd(2012)
½

Forgetting Stallone's take on Judge Dredd is hard, that movie sucked, but it was huge silly fun. However, only a movie as good as this one can make me forget about the LLAAAAAUUUUWWW from the silly 1995 movie, and replace it by Karl Urban's death serious and threatening "I am the law...", and man, does that work so well. Dredd is one action movie that has a tin story but wide execution, with some beautifully gory scenes in slow-mo, gun action all the way and some hand-blowing-up humor. It was indeed a surprise that they actually made someone look cool in that rather silly hat that Dredd uses.

I got to say, Karl Urban and Olivia Thirlby work great on-screen as Dredd and "Rookie" Cassandra Anderson, there was some chemistry right there. I don't know what to think of the villain, it wasn't bad, but it's nothing Joker-ish, but at least is played by one competent actress, Lena Heady as "Ma-Ma". I don't know why, but that's hilarious. The highlights from this movie are those slow-mo sequences that increased the tension and the magnificence of gore. Got to give credit, that was very inventive. Yet I did notice some plot similarities with The Raid: Redemption, and even some similar scenes, but Dredd at least had decent dialogue and took itself more seriously, something that we needed in Stallone's Judge Dredd.

Dredd is not a very special comic book movie, but it's a pretty solid one, and well put-together. It certainly worths, entertains and satisfies, more than necessary to succeed.

A History of Violence
½

Violence is always the answer...when you make it that way. And that's something this movie acknowledges and tells pretty well. A History of Violence is actually a pretty simple story: the dark past of the main character coming back, so now, he has to face it and face its consequences Simple, but effectively thrilling and compelling, and maybe it's more about two things rather than story-telling: violence and character.

This is another one of those movies like Blade Runner, where it's all about the meaning of it rather than what is told on the movie. What happens in the screen through the movie is only the basis to figure what is it about. I have an affair for those movies, maybe because I think the movie is not over until you come up with a conclusion, and when the movie is good, then that's something really cool about our modern cinema. Much of the movie is left open, but to personal conclusions, not to sequels or everything (after all, this is based on a graphic-novel) and that is something really hard to get done, but this movie nailed it. Do I recommend it? Well, if you can't hold sadness, maybe even then you can watch this, because it's more thrilling and intriguing (and provoking) than sad, at least until the credits roll, so yeah, I recommend this.

This movie is simple in story but complex and strong in its meanings and purposes. It's nice filmmaking, and for that, we thank them. It's not pretentious, and there's more for the viewers after the movie is done, all to fill on their own. A thoughtful story and surely an easily understandable one for all audiences.

Alice in Wonderland
½

I'm always a sucker for visuals. That's 30% for the movie. I'm also a sucker for medieval flavor in movies, that's a 10% more. And ultimately, acting is good, and that's the last 10% percent I can give this movie. The rest in Alice in Wonderland never gets that good to be remarkable. Why did it gross so much at the box-office? Great marketing, that's why. Tim Burton is getting a bit weak and short on excitement; nowadays it's weird when he comes up with something good like Frankenweenie.

Alice in Wonderland has great visuals that takes us over, if only the story was just as engrossing. But no, the storytelling is inconsistent, sporadic, messy and never gets a correct pacing: one thing could be happening and I wouldn't care either. I never felt so much wonder on the characters, they felt like early versions of themselves, and obviously, this Alice, while well played, isn't very charming. Other than the visuals, there's nothing very reliable to support the experience this movie gives. It does have an interesting scene at the end in the medieval-action climax, but even that is not much; Burton has done better before with action scenes. I felt almost the same way as Burton's Planet of the Apes: it's a new version of a classic story, with an action scene as the third act, and, while overall good, never gets too good to transform the movie into a good or worthy one.

Tim Burton's take on Alice in Wonderland is entertaining, but not worthy at all, but it's too late to say it so; the movie already grossed all our money and has a sequel coming up. It's that so? I really hope they improve. Otherwise, Burton's career will officially meet a fall.

Snow White and the Huntsman
½

I don't know if I watched a bad movie, or a slightly below "barely good" movie, but a great one, it isn't for sure. Snow White and the Huntsman has a problematic writing, where ideas seems forced, plots seems inexistent, and characters seems underused, all of them. Unlike another bad fairy tale like Alice in Wonderland, where it still stood true to its roots, this one has so many differences that it feels like any other story, EXCEPT Snow White.

I didn't feel that Kristen Stewart was the sweet and full of life Snow White; I didn't feel that Chris Hemsworth was a character at all, and I REALLY didn't feel that Charlize Theron was the Queen that the fairy tale made so classic. The movie has so many changes from the original fairy tale that it doesn't feel like Snow White at all, it can be just any other medieval movie because of that, actually, by the third act, this Snow White got transformed into Joan of Arc knock-off ¿Why? ¿Was there a huge sign petition for a Snow White meets Joan of Arc crossover movie? If that's so, ¿how come there were that many people that wanted that? ¿Why would they? I can't imagine someone thinking: "Hey, you know what would be cool? Snow White being Joan of Arc. Fuck The Avengers, THIS is the idea of the century!"; all this makes Snow White a mere marketing technique, nothing more, thus, it feels unnecessary to have Snow White as a basis. Acting is average, even speaking by Charlize Theron or Chirs Hemsworth, who had done well in other movies; then again, it might be because of the bad characterization that the script manages, and the performers can't do much about it. It has some good and multiple action scenes, but they aren't anything special, even if they give some entertaining relief. Special effects are good, but the overuse of those gets tiring by the third act. The score is good, but doesn't seem to play the right cue at the right moment. This movie just gets half the job done in every department, resulting in a lackluster experience.

This dark twist on the classic fairy tale is not very special or necessary at all; it would have been much easier to simply adapt the tale, and much better too. And if you're going to make a twist, do an actually interesting twist, not one with a lack of surprises. This Snow White is anything, except the actual Snow White.

Transformers: Dark of the Moon
½

Well, it's better than Revenge of the Fallen...that's pretty much it. But for the sake of my ego, I just have to say what I think of this movie, you know, let it go all the way. This movie has not many annoying and offensive stereotypes or overloaded storylines, but it still has four big problems: dumb-ass characters, dumb-ass story, over-produced action scene as the third act and repeating much of the first and the second. Let's dive in a little bit:

The story is bullshit, I mean, yet another alien secret covered-up? Seen that. The Autobots are apparently killed but they came back? Been there, done that. A final battle in the city? SEEN THAT BIG TIME IN THE FIRST MOVIE!!! Oh, but this is different, cause here it lasts and hour! ...no, that only makes it worst. The characters are just as dumb as always, but here, they really got out of their way on that. Sam keeps screaming a lot, the new girl just has to be slutty and dumb (in typical Michael Bay fashion), the human betrayer has to be annoying, the parents have to be odd, OH PLEASE NO! The movie also overstays its welcome, I mean, it was almost 3 hours long!!! When you get to repeat a lot of what you already did, it gets boring, and that's what I can say about this film save for that 1 hour final act of pure mindless action: boring. Still, the special effects are impressive as ever, the action is good and it entertains big time when the robots fight, but the rest is just too much to hold on our heads. It also ends almost immediately after the final battle, over like in 1 minute or less. This movie is just nothing really special, it's pure special effects and no character at all, with things and details re-ashed from the first film. Do something new for Christ sake!

Transformers Dark Side of the Moon is better than the second, but damn is it still annoying for the most part. It's loud, overlong and overdone, but not as much as the second movie. Much like the latter, watch it only for the action scenes, you can count the rest out.

Transformers
Transformers(2007)

Before its shameful sequels, this saga used to have a bit of dignity. This first Transformers movie has just too many fun elements to actually be as terrible as the movies that followed. We have our beloved Transformers, blowing shit up, fighting each other with incredible special effects and all to fill your 10 year old hunger for destruction. It still has some annoying stuff, but the movie as a whole it's OK. It fills just the right amount of details to be satisfying and fun, without feeling too much guilty.

The story is simple, the dialogue is average and some of the humor is odd and awkward, and the human characters are kinda boring when compared to the big-ass robots; speaking of which, the Transformers themselves are fun, they have those cheesy lines that everybody grew up listening to in the cartoons and their attitudes are loveable, even if some of them are purely character placement. I never thought Bumblebee was actually that charming, it was more like another painful and predictable character placement for me, but even that doesn't bother that much, he looks cool. Actually, this is a cool looking movie, it has great special effects, many explosions, good action scenes and the robots look cool, after all, who could forget that shot of Optimus Prime transforming from a Truck to a huge-ass robot during the battle of the city? That is an example of how good this movies looks. But then, what's wrong with it? Well, the writing is terrible, dare I say it. The story tries to have some kind of humor, but as previously stated it's awkward and odd, don't know if it's funny or not, but a glimpse of indifference rises all the time. The human characters are boring, but Shia LeBeouf gives some charm to our main character, this was before even Shia got lost, so that's OK. This movie's biggest problem is that the robots are the only good things; the rest is just average, and that does take note big time while watching it. Sometimes we just want to see robots fighting but we get 30 minutes of boring human scenes before that, and it's kinda painful. But, as also previously stated, it delivers quite a good time at the end.

Transformers could have been a lot better. It looked like a dark-serious movie, but ultimately it doesn't take itself seriously enough; but it also could have been a lot worse (it could have been like its sequels...). It's a fun movie and the only one in the franchise to be legitimately worth-watching for its few good details. It's not perfect at all, and almost overstays its welcome (it's almost two hours and a half long) but it's not greatly awful either. The good stuff worths and the bad stuff can be forgiven for it. Just have fun, this movie is easy to get on.

2010
2010(1984)
½

Simple: Without Kubrick, it's impossible to do a superior sequel to 2001: A Space Odyssey. With that out of the way, 2010: The Year We Make Contact is an entertaining space film that forgets the subtly, visual threat & poetry, and slow-pace of the previous film and goes for something more comprehensible in sight, special effects extravaganza and fast-paced affair, that actually makes the film much better than expected, but certainly not great. But that shouldn't be a huge problem, as this film doesn't ruin anything that 2001 did as one of the greatest films ever.

The cast of this movie is top-notch, with big names like Roy Scheider and Helen Mirren, to name a few, and we even get some cameo appearances. The music only reprises the "Also sprach Zarathustra", the main theme from 2001, the rest are new compositions. The visual effects are great, the story get interesting at times and it's entertaining on the meantime, and while the ending lacks a lot of wonder, it still completes the movie. The problem is that this movie is not as thought-provoking as Stanley Kubrick's original film; it lacks the imagery and poetry that made that film so mysterious and thus so great, it's kinda of a letdown, even if it is good by its own means. It's a very inferior movie, and while it doesn't set the bar low for the original, it doesn't do anything to up-lift it either. Maybe it wasn't necessary at all, but at least it was a worthy-unnecessary experience.

2010 is watchable and much better than many sequels usually can get, also, many less-demanding viewers will find it easier to get along than its predecessor, but for those of us that loved the original, this will be a bit of a disappointing experience. But it gets easier to get for us too if we just accept that nothing can surpass Kubrick's film; then we can enjoy this sequel a little more, and trust me, I prefer it that way. Not bad, it could have been a hell of a lot worse after all.

300: Rise of an Empire

How is it? It's OK, but just OK. It will not be the best of the year, but neither the worst. It's been a while since I watched a purely entertaining movie, I have instead watched only either great movies or bad movies, but never one that was simply fun. 300: Rise of an Empire is not as "good because it's simple" as its predecessor, this one mainly is a step down, but not entirely an awful movie. It's just...OK.

The acting is OK, but Eva Green is simply evil-ish splendid, she steals the screen every time she's on, and I found Sullivan Stapleton not that bad of a protagonist. The story, like its predecessor, it's simple and tin when remembering it, and many times runs on flashbacks and sometimes it's hard to guess in which period of time we're in, the past, present or future from the events of 300. The action scenes are good, and they are the most reliable thing on the movie, and they're accompanied by some epic backgrounds generated by either blue or green screen. The music is surprisingly fitting, and helps the movie's environments, so it seems most of the movie is OK, but...yeah, it fails on many departments, including the ones the previous movie failed too.

The dialogue lacks the "WWE" speeches that helped the previous movie being so cheesy enjoyable, even if we do get some decent dialogue, for the most part, it's terrible. The overuse of slow-motion and combination with fast forward and normal speed from the previous movie is still here; sometimes it helps building more atmosphere, and other times it just feels slow and even boring. But the worst detail is the blood...yeah, CGI blood looks bad already, but the blood generated here it's probably the most fake in history for a Hollywood film. It doesn't even look or feels like blood, IT FEELS LIKE RED JELLY! It certainly is disappointing, because the gore is a huge part of a movie like this one. And, I don't know why, but this movie lacks that "something" that made 300 so badly enjoyable, maybe it's this movie's lack of quotable lines or the fact that it had a constant visual style. Bottom line, 300: Rise of an Empire is pretty hit and miss, but the hits are actually good hits. We should take this movie as a guilty pleasure. ¿Does it worth all the way? No, but the stuff that leaves with us from the theatre is no guilty at all. Take it for what it's worth, just turn-off your brain for a while and enjoy the good stuff.

An American Tail
½

A sweet animated adventure by the father of animated movies in the 80's, Don Bluth. While not his most excellent work, American Tail is still a worth-watching movie that has some very moving scenes emotionally, and also, entertaining.

To be honest, I never find the overall affair of this movie that engaging, and it lost me on several scenes, specially the slow ones. The songs are good, but I barely remember one of them, nothing Disney-ish at least. Animation is top-notch, after all, it is Don Bluth and his team of awesome animators, which always assures quality, and the movie even uses rotoscope, which helps many times. The story, in general, is good, but nothing too deep or intriguing like Secret of Nimh, even if it does have its sweet-thoughtful moments. Hands down, the best scene was the end, looking at the finished Statue of Liberty: a very wonderful scene that really crates a subtle emotional response within ourselves, feeling similar (but not quite) as when watching Fantasia's Ave Maria.

An American Tail is a classic animated movie that still works today, but maybe not in the same way as in the 80's. Still, it sure worth the trip and the troubles, and there's some heavy stuff you will never forget.

Evangelion: 3.0 You Can (Not) Redo

The third movie in the Rebuild of Evangelion tries a change in the scenery and mood of the first two movies. Unfortunately, the result is not very fitting or satisfying. Evangelion 3.0 goes to a more darker and post-apocalyptic earth than it already was in Evangelion 1.0 and 2.0. This part of the story apparently adapts episodes 21-24 of the series, but Hideki has changed a lot of details. As we should know, the movie was pushed back several times before its November 2012 release. This is why: a radical change.

Evangelion 3.0 starts well, but in a very confusing way. We don't know what is going on, and in the meantime, we spend a lot of runtime in slow, boring scenes, and things keep getting more confusing and provoking, but it's not like they will actually give us an aswer. The biggest let down is when we are told it's been 14 years since the events in Evangelion 2.0...wow, Hideki, you're drunk, man. Do you know how many shit happened in ONE DAY in the previous movies? A lot, and simply jumping almost a decade and a half is a real punch to the balls. From there, the rest is thought-provoking but messy. We spend a lot of time with main character Shinji and new long-time beloved character Kaworu (one of my favorite characters in the original series) which is good, but I'll rather have more psychological character development like in the first two movies. The story is good, but it should've have more size and scope instead of center it only in three characters most of the time. Dialogue and visuals are as cryptic and symbolic as ever, but with so much going on it's hard to pay attenton to everything; it's like the movie is forcing us to watch it more than once. Also, we still have to figure out what exactly happened between those 14 years, because everything looks so changed and...it's just a mess, not only confusing, but messy and incoherent at times, and even if Evangelion has gone there before, it still had a structure there, you just had to find it using your knowledge in psychology and symbolism, but here it's just too much to buy for an hour and a half movie, that we waited for FOUR YEARS!

Now to the technical aspects: characters (the three most important, that is Shinji,the main character; Kaworu and Rei III) are well developed, the music is great, the animation is high-definition of awesomeness and the environments are well done, overall, the movie is still wonderful. The rest in terms of hype and story are disappointing. Evangelion 3.0's change of scenery is too heavy and different that it doesn't quite feel like the other two movies, and barely feels any Evangelion-ish. This one stays far from the series and the new material is just average, sporadic or simply improbable for those like us that love and understands this series. The WILLE organization, the rebellion against NERV, the story been set 14 years later, it's all very stupid stuff. I don't know how this will drive to a new ending, but they better do it great. I loved the first Evangelion movie, I even have the second movie as one of my favorites of all time, but this one is just disappointing and lacks so much of the charm of the previous two and that from the series. It's still good, but not great: it's too dark, drown-out, but surely raises interest in what is going to happend in the next film, set to be the big finale. Evangelion 3.0 just can't keep the legacy of its wonderful source material, and for a new version, that's a huge sin, enough reason to cause Third Impact already.

Predators
Predators(2010)

Well, this series seems to be the one that's going to attract hate towards me, but I got to be honest. I think this is the first worth-watching Predator movie. I really couldn't get into the 87' original, even if I understood why it is regarded as a classic. The sequel wasn't any better; in fact, it was wayyyy worse than what it should. Then, we go the Alien VS Predator movies, and they all sucked. It seems this saga just wasn't for me, but this take by Nimrod Antal was actually pretty satisfying and middling-fun. It did have fun with itself at times and compensates its slow, boring moments with great action.

It's not a great movie though; it does have its big fails. Such like the plot being explained by the characters, confusing it with character development, or the slow-boring pace it takes on several times, or the lack of attachment to the characters, or the lack of subtly, etc. This movie does have some annoying stuff, but for me, it is the first Predator movie that actually satisfied me in a way. My great disappointment in the first movie came in the third act: it was slow and lacked excitement, and I was annoyed by the fact that we see the Predator's POV while he's battling Arnold, damn that view was so blurry and illegible. But here, the movie knows that when we want Predator action, we want it clear and legible in sight, and for that, we thank you. So yeah, this movie did had a good climax and some good music, but that barely overcomes its failures.

Predators is a solid entry in the saga and, in my opinion (and to most hatred) the best of all the movies. Again, sorry that I couldn't get into the original, but this one I did and I have to be honest with you and me. For me, this is better than the 87' original, even if by my standards, it's not saying much. A satisfying action movie.

Predator 2
Predator 2(1990)

I never got into the first Predator movie, it was slow and lacked any climatic moments, even if it did had some thrilling moments. I knew going through Predator 2 wouldn't be easy, sadly, I was right. Predator 2 is even slower and less exciting, and even lacks thrilling moments and Arnold in the main role, even if Danny Glover did well.

The story is kinda good, but lacks energy and correct execution. The characters outside of Glover and The Predator are forgettable, the action is average, the special effects sucks at times and it's a huge bore. It does have some interesting scenes, like the one in the subway train and the inside of the Predator's ship, but even that's not saying much, for the most part it's just boring. I can't believe how they stretched the final act of Glover versus the Predator to nearly 40 minutes; as a consequence, it goes slow and it doesn't have anything remarkable or interesting to keep our attention during those moments, and man, it's a boringly painful experience.

It was hard to watch this, I yawned big time during most of the movie. There's really nothing into it, even the good stuff gets over-shadowed by this movie's boredom, making Predator 2 a very forgettable movie. Truly empty and boring.

AVP - Alien Vs. Predator

Two sagas come together, two great sci-fi influences finally clashing each other...by the hand of Paul W.S. Anderson?! Let me guess then...it sucks. Oh, was I right? What are the chances!

First, let's do a brief re-cap on both sagas. The Alien saga is one of my favorites, even if the third and fourth entries are awful. It's because of the first two movies, specially the second (Aliens, by James Cameron) being my favorite movie of all time, and also had the best designed aliens in history. The Predator saga is different though; it's about one monster haunting, rather than a species looking for population on Earth. I never get into the Predator movies, but that doesn't mean it's not important to cinema history. So, if a crossover of these two sagas is being made, it needs careful direction, writing and a great story, along with great special effects and intense action scenes...but this one is made by Paul Anderson, who only takes action. Maybe it was cheaper to have him instead of a five-star director, but something like Alien vs Predator NEEDS only the best crew, not the most streamline out there. Now that we got that out of the way, let's look more into the actual movie:

The characters are forgettable and labeled: there's the courageous woman (that never tops Ripley at all), the socially awkward nerd, the rude guy that never cares, the black guy that dies quickly, etc. pretty much clapboard characters like the consensus says. The dialogue makes no sense and the lines are bland, the music is barely noticed and the movie as a whole never lives up to anything, and when it seems to come to that, we are surrounded by the bad things all over again. Oh, but it doesn't stop there, there's plenty of details to nitpick, cause the movie deserves it, but I'm not going to be too deep on this:

When the title of your movie is Alien VS Predator, that means action scenes are necessary, I mean, note-to-note-the-freaking-saying, it's very obvious, isn't it? Or is it too hard to understand, Anderson? And if you do make action scenes, you need three things: first, FILM THEM WELL. Second, have a great choreography. And third, have them very constantly in the movie; don't make us wait a whole hour to enjoy them only to have dull ones. Being Anderson, none of these three things are given justice. The action scenes aren't that good, only the first fight with a Predator and an Alien was cool, the others felt dull, even the final one with the Computer-Generated Alien Queen never gets too exciting. And also, I am pissed off on how they put the Mayans and Aztecs as a civilization that worshiped the Predators, oh Hollywood, you merciless fucktard. These civilizations are known for their advanced acknowledge and the big impact it made on cultures around the world because of that, but why should the Americans care for that? For them, even the Mayans were assholes that needed a Hollywood figure to be the geniuses they're apparently were. Too much self-indulgent Hollywood, WAY TOO SELF-INDULGENT. How could you? How could you make two great sagas mere insults to human history? Well, I shouldn't care, it was done in Ronald Emmerich's StarGate already, and seeing how this movie didn't fill my hunger for an epic Alien vs Predator movie, then the rest doesn't matter, I guess.

Alien vs Predator doesn't even get to be a guilty pleasure: it's so disappointing, so lackluster and so un-ambitious that I can't help but feel indifferent to this movie. Maybe I'll come back to see that first fight that was cool, but even for that, I can simply look out for it on YouTube, I don't need to go a whole hour in again to see that. This crossover had all the elements to work, and it didn't use them. Sad, but Anderson always does this since after Mortal Kombat. Damn, I mean, Anderson, do you know what's effort? No? Well then, fuck you Anderson.

Quest for Fire

While it can be repetitive on some standing still scenes, Quest for Fire correctly portrays the early human race in its unexpected next step to evolve as a society. I'm going to be a bit too deep on why this works, because a film with practically no legible language surely requires some deep analysis.

Quest for Fire works because it does put on screen how the primitive human race started to learn, adapt, think and even communicate via signs, facial expressions and mimics, way before we learn to have actual dialogue. It puts also how important the fire was for the world, and it's even put correctly on the first text of the movie: having fire meant having life. Through the movie, we see how some tribes relentlessly killed for this element, how much they risked to get such element, how far they needed to go, and we even get to see how our main characters learn to produce fire instead of having to go to the other side of the earth to get it. This movie also subtly puts how important women are in our evolution and develop as a race: one of them teaches our main character to be loved and even how to make love...that's weird but adequate, somehow. Also, she teaches the main character's tribe to produce fire, so, mission accomplished. Overall, Quest for Fire is an analysis on the mind of the early human.

It also has some funny stuff there, never too slapstick to feel like a comedy. A film without legible dialogue sure is hard to make, but director Jean-Jacques Annaud nailed it with this movie's crispt direction, pacing, humor and good execution. An entertaining film about the origins of communication.

Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem (AVP 2)
½

How am I supposed to see this movie if the lightning is barely present? How can I enjoy the Aliens vs Predator matches if the editing is extremely confusing? How could I even sit through its entire 93 minute runtime? This, like many questions, might never be answered, but one this is for sure...this wasn't pleasant at all.

This film includes average fighting with vomit-ich editing, cool special effects out shadowed by, ironically, the lack of lightning (seriously, 60% percent of the film seems to be a pure black screen) and nonchalant acting. All this was bothering and really uncomfortable to watch. This had more action scenes than the previous film, but damn, the editing is stupid. And, damn, WHY IS EVERYTHING SO OBSCURE AND DARK?! BUY SOME STAGE LIGHTS FOR GOD'S SAKE! How am I gonna watch your film if you barely shot anything clearly? Even the daylight scenes have a dark scheme, like if they used filter-lens to film the whole shit. I gave up on the characters since they were first introduced, after all, more than half of them always die, so this wasn't a bothering, ironically, we can say they did not disappoint on this. It's the rest that's horribly executed. Is an Alien VS Predator movie that hard to make? Just put the Alien vs the Predator, AND FILM IT WELL! Hell, years before this we had Arnold vs a Predator and Ripley in a Cargo suit against the Alien Queen, AND WE CAN'T EVEN HAVE A DECENT FIGHT WITH THE SPECIAL EFFECTS OF TODAY! I wasn't expecting this to be any better, but damn, they always fuck-up far from expected. That's a shameful talent.

This second movie was just horrible. The first one was just bad, but this one got things all wrong and annoyingly bothering. I've seen worse movies, but this one will always represent a very awful experience. For the first time, I wanted both the Predator and the Alien to die quickly and put me out of this misery.

Return to Oz
Return to Oz(1985)

Return to Oz is not bad because it's darker, it's not bad because it lacks songs, it's not bad at all. It's just...very inferior. This isn't necessarily a sequel to the 1939 version, but the comparisons are still at hand, cause it's a cinematic version of the books, and this one doesn't quite do as good. It is entertaining, it does have good characters, it does have some good imagery, but the story itself never gets too exciting.

There's just not much to recall other than the imagery. In the previous cinematic adaptation, we had a lot to recall: the yellow brick road, the characters, the emerald city...this movie shows some good scenarios too, but then again, nothing gets too exciting, and in a movie about a travel to a magic world, that's bad. Unfortunately that's a big problem here, and maybe it's the only thing it got wrong, but it was huge detail gone wrong. It's not bad, but it isn't very remarkable.

Return to Oz could have been worse nevertheless, it could have been like the recent Oz: The Great And Powerful, but the things this got wrong are still noticeable and problematic, and at times, bothering. I didn't feel all that comfortable or charmed, but neither scared nor creeped-out, but definitely intrigued by this film's outstanding imagery and stop-motion effects. It is worth checking out, just have in mind that it never gets to be like the 1939, plus this one is based on the books and are actually closer to the latter ones than the 1939 film, so there's a chance of you liking it anyway. Not bad, but still half-satisfying, never entirely.

RoboCop
RoboCop(2014)

It sucks. That's the easiest way to describe this Robo-babble remake. When first analyzed, it seems to be actually able to work. I mean, there's Padiha, the director of Elite Squad, a man perfect for a cop.action movie. Then we also have Samuel L. Jackson, Gary Oldman and Michael Keaton. But all is lost and lackluster in this new boring version of RoboCop for new boring generations.

Let's get this clear for once: all of the things that made the original great are not here. So, let's review this as a new movie, almost like there wasn't any RoboCop before this one, no comparisons but one, we'll get to that later. The story is just "OK" but the development is not. The characters aren't interesting, not even RoboCop. I wonder why he's called RoboCop when he's barely in a Police Station, most of the time, he's dealing with his cliched human-machine plot and resolving crimes in the most forgettable of ways during the action scenes. The character development is there...just not interesting. When the movie can have strong emotional moments, it cuts to another scene with the company and you get sick of that pretty fast. The special effects are good, but when RoboCop moves, it's like watching a character from the Crisis videogame series. Plus, his "look" in this version is nothing special. For a bit of it we do see him in his original colors, and he looks awesome. But when they change it to black, it's like Batman Begins and Daft Punk had a son, it's not very impressive. Looks cool, but doesn't fit. The movie just never lives up to anything: it feels like nothing was accomplished. Even the action scenes aren't that good, they're average and forgettable. This RoboCop just fails in almost every department. Now with the comparison with the original: the rating. This is a PG-13 remake of a R-Rated movie. The violence and gore helped the story BIG TIME, but the lack of it here is just annoying, but strangely enough, we do see some gruesome things, i won't say when or what, but it might be the goriest PG-13 movie, with still no blood. The humor? What humor? There's little to none of that here, something the original had. And the character of RoboCop felt like something in the original, here is just a guy that doesn't feel any special at all. This remake blows.

Why does Hollywood change all the good stuff in the remakes? Why not improve over the bad stuff? Because that would be good, and they can't give us that. RoboCop is totally forgettable and unnecessary. You what you need to watch? The Lego Movie, not this movie that i'll forget the next day. Nice try, but needs some attachment. It's almost like the Total Recall reboot: it's nothing special and it isn't worth. Watch and adore the original instead.

RoboCop 3
RoboCop 3(1993)

RoboCop 3 is the weakest and last fainting gasp of the series. While not technically terrible, Robo 3 is just nothing reliable and works on stuff seen already in many other movies, all but the first two RoboCop movies.

The story is bland and boring, the new characters are nothing special, RoboCop has no evolution, the action is dull, the effects are dull, the villain is boring, the lack of crudeness is highly noticeable, and the ending is as sporadic as the other two movies. I really never felt that this movie tried anything, it never got my attention, I never felt comfortable, I never felt alive, I never felt anything. I take movies as experiences, and sadly, RoboCop 3 was just an unnecessary and empty experience. It doesn't feel human, it doesn't deliver any emotion, not even bad ones...and that's humanely insulting.

It does have one or two good things, but they are buried by the movie's emptiness and never gets to reach the surface. This is a movie that literally leaved me with nothing, and I'm sure I'll soon forget that it exists. This was just a plain dreadful experience, even if it technically wasn't painful at all...it just felt all ghostly, never alive or interested on anything. My friends call me Maineutral, but this movie can call me "dead", as dead as the day is long.

Robocop 2
Robocop 2(1990)

You know how many sequels to classic films usually fail in repeating the same awesomeness? Well, much like RoboCop came from a different thriller concept, this sequels also seems to be from a different "sequel-assembly line", because the fails of RoboCop 2 are merely on its sub-plots, rather than its comparisons with the original, as it seems to follow them right. I never expected anything great, but this movie isn't AS bad as everyone says, because there's some pretty fun stuff to show and see.

It does have a lot of problems: RoboCop has little development and it's forgotten after the first third; then the second third had him being all cocky and friendly, and in the last third he isn't even a character anymore, as this third is spend mostly on the enemy ("Cain" RoboCop 2) and how he defeats him. The story also has sub-plots that doesn't get anywhere, like RoboCop's wife (or widow, technically speaking), his humanism, his partnership with Anne, the police on-strike, and many more. It's all forgotten and all comes down to a fight to destroy RoboCop model 2. It's also confusing in who's the villain, and even if we choose one, it's bizarre, because one (Cain) has no back-story, no development at all and fights RoboCop at the end after being transformed. The second one (Hob) is a FREAKING KID, literally, a kid, like 10 or 11 year old, and he says words like "fuck" or "bitch", he uses freaking guns, he's a drug dealer, he's a master planner and even gets to be the boss of the organization once lead by Cain. That's both stupid and nuts, and also insulting. Yeah, RoboCop 2 is a mess of a movie: it doesn't even end its own plots, RoboCop feels alienated and disappears for a long time in the movie after getting used to him and it's like the character was re-set and it's an un-attaching being again.

Yet, the stuff that's good here IS REALLY, REALLY GOOD. The action is good, the effects are good given the budget, it never reaches boredom, and the final act of RoboCop vs RoboCop 2 is some pretty heavy stuff there. It does have its big failures, but Robo 2 worths your time and, while bad, isn't AS bad as you might think. I'm glad I saw it and put my time into it, and I'm sure I'll watch it again if the opportunity is given. A pretty fun and midly satisfying sequel.

RoboCop
RoboCop(1987)

RoboCop isn't as action packed as advertised, but maybe because we are getting used to dumb-action movies with a fight every 5 minutes. Dark humor, gore, crisp story of the man-inside-the-machine, and lots of broken glass is what RoboCop has to offer. But what makes RoboCop a true classic?

Well, there are a lot of things actually: maybe the fact that the film can be taken seriously even with all the over-the-top feeling of it. Also, the death and robotic resurrection of Murphy is very tragic, maybe because we see an era in the movie were the society is so affected that when crime is at its highest, we still want to pretend that everything is fine. After all, there are scenes were things are exploiting, or persons getting shot, and yet the people act like nothing happens. Maybe because Murphy is a Jesus allegation, or more simply, because RoboCop can shoot rapists in the dick, and that's awesome.

My downsides were mostly forgettable score and the ending, which I thought was pretty rushed and didn't show a resonance on the characters or the story. Nevertheless, RoboCop is a great "action" flick of the early years, which had its crappy PG-13 remake this year of 2014. It's definitely a film that's worth watching for what it is.

Metropolis
Metropolis(2002)

Probably a movie that's only visually superior to the original, and also one of the best anime movies I've seen. Metropolis borrows subtly from the 1927 German film to create undiluted magnificence. With superb animation, some of the best visuals ever and a strong emotional development, this Japanese animated film is one in a million.

Much like The End of Evangelion, the visuals are the greatest achievement of the movie, but that doesn't mean the other aspects aren't remarkable. The animation is incredible: fluid, moving, carefully drawn and with its attention to high-detail: all elements feel alive. The music can get a little cheesy, but it's great music, even if I would rather use a complete orchestra than some rhythmical techno-babble music; but granted, there are some orchestral tracks, I just would prefer the whole soundtrack to be like that. I think this is one of those movies with an out-of-body experience. The most interesting things are in the background and not in the forth-ground as expected, and that's good, cause we like such stuff, and I noticed it only happens when the animated characters aren't there or aren't doing something important, great accomplishment there.

While the 1927 original is superior, I have to admit this one beats it in the visuals. I mean, the original also has incredible visuals for 1927, but this also has incredible visuals even for today, and, well, color is color, and this one has it. Not exactly a remake, but still can top the 1927 German film. If there's a downside, it would be that the animation sometimes goes a little too slow, maybe because it wants to emphasize that what's happening is important and has to be dramatic, but it does reach a point where you have to think: "can you...move it a little faster than that?", but at least the slow animation is fluid and not merely 1 frame per 30 seconds. A movie that can become one of your best visual experiences.

The Greatest Story Ever Told
½

If the Bible means anything to an ignorant is that it's an anthology of pure epic stories. Moses, Noah, you get the point. But the most important one, of course, it's the story of the son of God, Jesus. But this movie instead, decided that telling the bible version would be too much, so let's adapt a book by Fulton Oursler...fair enough, a good book with a decent budget to adapt, and a long runtime to fulfill, the perfect elements to do the best Jesus movie ever...yeah, it didn't work with the big stuff, so you can imagine how terrible it is with the little things.

First of all, what's with the rushed pacing? The story goes so fast that I can't get attached to the characters or the performers, so acting is scrapped here, even if it's good. The music is OK, the dialogue is decent, but...yeah, the only fault is so big it makes the movie unworthy of anything. It's 3 hours long, and it never gives the proper time to actually tell anything with care and love. I'm not being harsh, I'm just being honest, and the pacing of this movie is a huge problem. You're telling the life of Jesus, not a sports car movie!

This should have been a classic, but it's a forgettable epic. And I don't know how, but they somehow make Jesus a boring figure here. Max Von is a great actor, but implausible and un-entertaining as Jesus. Badly wasted and unsatisfying.

Army of Darkness
½

Yeeeeeaaaaaaaahhhhh baaaaby! This was huge FUN! Army of Darkness is a short, less scary but super fun movie that ends the Evil Dead trilogy in a hilarious and strangely fitting note. One-liners, cool attitudes, fun stuff, slapstick and entertaining are at hand in Sam Raimi's Army of Darkness.

The first Evil Dead was a great film: scary, subtly, dark and memorable, but it wasn't huge fun in terms of slapstick. The second was even better: not only was it scary, but it was also funny in the slapstick territory, and we found out it worked better that way. The third one now gets rid of the scary element and goes purely on fun slapstick. It might disappoint some, but for me, I don't care, cause one: it was obvious that the second one couldn't be surpassed; and two: I prefer slapstick of horror, so the movie can have fun with itself for God's sake. Thanks to this, we can say the whole trilogy is just great and worth.

Army of Darkness might be the most rentable of the Evil Dead movies, even if it's the less satisfactory of them. It still represents a huge entertaining and fun movie. If you're sick to death of really crappy spoofs, Adam Sandler or Rob Schneider movies, Army of Darkness is your movie to actually have fun. Highly recommended.

Carrie
Carrie(2013)

This movie is one of those movies that entertains but doesn't quite scare or thrill. This movie's fault by my opinion is that is doing things, but not in the way they should. Julianne Moore's character at first is enigmatic and scary but ultimately falls into laughable religious dull person stereotype, and drains all scaryness out of her. Also, scenes that should be disturbing end up being "cool". Instead of feeling sorry for the killings made by Carrie at the prom, i actually think they died in cool ways, probably by the way they shot these scenes. Also, i always despise the typical school teenagers that just have to be assholes, i know the story needs them, but almost the entire world? Come on. The final act is very lacklusting, but the Prom scene is actually very good. When i watch a horror movie, i'm expecting a long epilogue scene after the climax to give time to story, but Carrie, much like many slasher horror movies, simply puts a "character is here" scene and it ends. That always feels empty, why the directors continue to do that? It pisses me off.

However i don't think this movie is awful at all, it's very watchable and entertaining, thanks to the management of the story, the performances and the special effects when Carrie uses her powers. Peirce's Carrie has problems, but it's ultimately a descent film.

Special mention to Chloe Grace's performance. She did awesome.

Iron Man 3
Iron Man 3(2013)
½

Many critics call this a pretty solid and fun ride of a movie, with little problems to deal with. It is that...for non comic book fans. But for those who are actually looking for a loyal comic-book movie, Iron Man 3 kicks the bucket many times.

First, Robert Downey Jr. is the best element of this movie: he keeps the movie up and on-track, and of course, he makes it more fun than what it is. The rest of the cast is also good and help the movie for the most part. Special effects and music, top notch. Action scenes, greatly mounted and executed...for the most part...or least. Story? Better than Iron Man 2. Dialogue? Fun and smart, tightly writted. That's all the elements to make a movie work, and Iron Man 3 does well all of those. Yet, there's some other problems that makes this movie MY PERSONAL least favorite of the three. I'm not saying it's awful, just the one with less satisfaction, by my experience.

The problems that makes me indifferent to Iron Man 3 are pretty big to simply deal with them: I was a bit dissapointed by the lack of AC/DC here, not a big point, but in Iron Man, Iron Man 2 and even The Avengers, AC/DC represented big part of Iron Man's personality and style. Without it, it kinda makes the character of Iron Man feel incomplete. But that's a very minor problem, we're getting to the most bothering ones as we continue: the very promoted armor MK-42 was highly hyped since it was showed, but the movie kinda uses it as a comedy relief; it keeps dissasembling over and over, and thus his other functions are also incomplete. Why put the hero in his most lackluster armor? Plus i don't remember Tony using the armors most of the time. It's good to show the hero's humanity and all that, but we already saw that in the other two movies. The action scenes are the best of the trilogy, but still they have botherings: most of the action scenes are Iron Man or Tony getting kicked in the ass instead of him kicking-ass. While Iron Man 2 featured three one-on-one fight scenes, Iron Man 3 features only one: against our "true" villain. That battle is cool, but Tony only uses two armors to fight him, this could have been more exploited, and leaved me with dissapointing lenght: the fight is 2 minutes long for the most. Also, what is up with all the other armors? We mostly see them doing only one action and then we never see them again, not before auto-destruction. All this of Iron Man's armor was very hyped but i found that they worked little from that. However, like i said, the action scenes are very well filmed and executed for the most.
Talking about character execution; i would've liked to see more Iron Patriot in action, like when he was War Machine in Iron Man 2, but all we got was just show-off stuff with that armor, i felt like it was there just to look cool instead of doing cool stuff. One more detail: the outcome of the story. Tony quitting his life as Iron Man was unconvincing for me. I think that was just a rushed-felt idea to have the character in a large cliff-hanger until Avengers: Age of Ultron. They know we need Iron dude in the group, so of course you're going to have him back anyway, why even bother in having him quitting? This was a very dissapointing ending. I came to see Iron Man, but i saw Tony Stark: The First Movie.

And noooow the biggest problem, the shit-stopper, the greatest mistake made by this movie, the biggest sin any comic book movie can do with it's villain, one of the most-hated twists in comic-book movie history: The Mandarin. My god, the build-up was one of the most awesome ones for a villain. They showed us frightening images and videos of him being a terrorist, sending messages of fear and keeping us in our seats every time he was on screen. They builded it up so greatly, that we even started to think this might surpass Heath Ledger's The Joker in The Dark Knight, widely remembered as the best villain in comic-book movie. And what happened? Turns out it's a decoy: the real villain is that douchy Aldrich which origin is strangely similar to The Incredible's villain Syndrome (Marvel is taking way too seriously his purchase by Disney, now they feel they need help from Pixar to write his stories), and which personality and character it's just annoying instead of threatening. This was my biggest let down in Iron Man 3. The Mandarin is the greatest villain of Iron Man, his archnemesis, this universe's Joker. This heroe's pain in the ass. The villain which Iron Man always had his greatest and most dangerous battles. And here, in this "comic-book movie" is none of that. It's just Aldrich, a character that in the comic just suicided at the beginning of the "Extremis" story arc, which this movie grabs some details. It's not villain from the comics, it's a Syndrome rip-off. I don't think Guy Pierce did that good to be the villain, all i see on him is a dumb mollycoddle which ambitions makes him annoying. Also, what a way to waste an actor like Ben Kingsley. God, i mean, he won awards you know? He could've potrayed your villain better than anybody, and you have him as another comedy relief. Fucking Marvel-Disney dumbasses. It's a pretty good twist for non comic fans, but even some movie-goers can find this dissapointing, by building the villain so much and just came up with a comedy routine. Iron Man 2 never did such a thing, and that's why i think is a little bit better, like an fly's wing.

Bottom line, Iron Man 3 is a pretty solid, well put-together movie that audiences will love, comic fans will despise and movie goers will find as a mixed bag. In all those grounds, it's a good movie with very big holes it can't fill. It can't be the worst of the year, but it surely grabs the comic and shits on it instead of being as loyal as a dog to it. Great, but it's as much despicable as loveable.

What Women Want
½

This movie represented a bit of a special moment, i watched it with my mother (might she rest in peace) and we both had fun with it. However, that doesn't mean it couldn't been a lot better. The premise actually pays off at first, but when it turns into a romantic drama is were the potential is lost and the movie feels empty. The concept of a man actually being able to understand women by reading her minds could have use a bit more exploitation and better management. I think is a good movie for a weekend, but is one of those movies that you don't remember the following day. Gibson however delivers a very believable character here.

47 Ronin
47 Ronin(2013)

How can this movie had so much and yet nothing? Like this: Many characters, but none of them are developed well, we don't see them evolve and they can't put us on their world. Many action scenes, but no rivalry or decent shots to fully enjoy them. Many special effects, but none that stands out other than the Dragon-Serpent-Witch. Much story to tell, and yet little care to even tell it.

47 Ronin fails because of a very weak script that can't live-up to the other technical aspects. Keanu Reeves is shown as the star, but feels more like a supporting character, thanks to the terrible script. The romance has no interest moments, it isn't developed correctly and the actors don't seem to have chemistry between them. And, what could have been strong dialogue; it's just poems and poems: instead of dialogue, we have a shit load of metaphors, poetic talk and lack of humor.

47 Ronin doesn't work as a barely "OK" movie, and neither as a guilty pleasure: all that transcends are the bad things, and the good ones aren't good enough to recall. But we have to give credit that, even if the good stuff doesn't transcend, it was done and present in the movie. It's just an experience you'd rather don't go through. It's forgettable and irrelevant.

Superman IV: The Quest for Peace

It has good intentions, but the objetive is to reach them, thing that Superman IV is very short. Even if Reeve gives his best as the star, the rest of the film is poor, a very stupid way to end a saga that started and continued really good that had a bright future. Now, Superman is somwhere there, crying and suffering thanks to this.

V/H/S
V/H/S(2012)
½

55% by critics? 41% by audiences? This is unfair guys. Sure isn't very scary, true it overstays its welcome, sure the frame narrative isn't very intriguing, but i think it was well executed. Remember those days, when the internet and YouTube were very young? We often look out for cool videos. Some of them were "real" horror tapes or recordings. We didn't look for movie trailers, celebrity gossip, bloggers or reviewers. It was all about home media recordings. For me, V/H/S is a reminder of those days, when we often searched for videos to have fun. Today, is kind of a living. Being this an anthology film, then i should review each of the horror tapes this anthology film offers.

Tape 56/Frame Narrative

This is the "main story", the reason we see all these tapes. This itself is a tape too, so it's part of the anthology, or something like that. Overall, I thought it was unengaging. Sure it's interesting, but it's the weakest of the tapes. I was intrigued by the final segment before the final tape. It was like in Paranormal Activity, only in low-resolution, and not as intriguing. Being this the frame narrative, it's disappointing and lackluster. Each time we come back to this narrative it gets interesting, but the resolution is lazy.

Amateur Night

This tape has a weird execution, it's mostly about a bunch of assholes trying to have sex, but one of them (the one that's recording this tape) picks this weird creepy girl. As expected, she is the frightening thing of this tape. As a whole, this tape is lukewarm the enough. The true nature of the girl is really terrifying and the end of the clip was pretty cool, but not really scary. However, i give credit, it was a good tape.

Second Honeymoon

Not truly scary or terrifying, and boring for the most of it. The best thing was the resolution, it becomes a tragic romance-drama, you end up like: "Ow.......hum........wow." But, to be honest, it's practically a Medical Detectives case before entering on investigation. Not great until the end.

Tuesday the 17th

Stupid title, but hands down the best tape of the movie. It's short, learner and highly intriguing, and also frightening. I liked the clichéd backstory, and the way the killer of this tape is shown: only by tracking errors. That was cool, awesome and terrifying at the same time, it's like you can and can't see it. Like many found-footage shit, it never explains what it is. But I guess that's good, because maybe if the entire movie was about this one tape, it would be labeled as a Friday the 13th rip-off, so it's better as how it is. The coolest thing about this movie.

The Sick Thing That Happened to Emily When She Was Younger

This was interesting. Once again, it grabs some Paranormal Activity fashion, but the story itself seems to belong to a full-movie, not a short tape. It was more touching than terrifying, but it holds up well at this point of the movie. It includes some men fan-service, but ultimately unnecessary.

10/31/98

Another stupid name, but as the final tape and overall final segment of the movie, it is very entertaining, I liked how they grabbed some Poltergeist stuff without leaving the subtly out. It was good, but I prefer Tuesday the 17th. Also, at this point the whole movie had overstayed its welcome, so it's kind of tiring. Good, but already late.

As you can see, V/H/S isn't the best horror film, or one of the scariest, but it was cool and a great reminder of the old days of the internet, looking for cool videos and not reviews or full-movies. Sure I think is overrated, but is not that great either. I liked it, many didn't. Bad for them and bad for me.

Does everyone in every single tape have to be a sex addict?

Friday the 13th
½

More like a "tribute" than an actual film. I felt like i just saw pieces from all the previous Friday the 13th movies, which they formed here as "A New Film". This series at least goes back to the more classic routine, yes, it's a routine: we have saw this more than a billion of times and we'll still see this a billion times more (another film for 2015 has been announced after all).

I mean, sure it's better than Jason X or Jason Takes Manhattan, but it's just a matter of time before the series goes ridiculous again, and even here it comes back but with all the same fails too. There are no scares, tension or memorable moments, but don't worry, we still have all the unecessary sex, perverts, dumb/high/horny teenagers and predictible deaths. It's all just the same, it's just another sequel disguised as a reboot. Nothing new, nothing compelling, nothing that leaves with you after the movie ends. It's average and tiring cinema.

Nevertheless, it's a relief that they're at least making this less-awful than normal, because yeah, it's technically well-constructed, just nothing new or necessary. If you are familiar with the series, then this might be good for you, but for me, the saga doesn't deserve to be classic. It failed, and it had 12 opportunities to convince me, and thus, failed 12 times. Will i watch the 2015 film? Yes, because I'll have the classic "I watched all the previous ones, one more will not harm me". Sorry Jason, but you don't leave an impression on me. At least you fought Freddy...i just remembered that this movie's title appeared at 25 minutes in...well, it tried.

The LEGO Movie

Who could say that a movie with laughs at every minute, featuring charming characters, The Batman, and a well written story could possibly be good?...Well, the Lego Movie surely did. This is an animated movie that actually is something different from other animated movies. This one is not purely on taking money of our pockets: it makes us want the movie to take our money if we're in for the great-fun experience we are about to watch.

What is great about The Lego Movie? Certainly the constant gags that are always funny, and I don't want to give any of them away, it's a lot better when you go through them by yourself. Another might be that the movie intentionally grabs a lot of movie clichés and subtly laughs at them by putting them here. They're obvious, but the more obvious it is, the more necessary it gets to take presence in the movie. Another thing that works is that it's an adventure, with constant action scenes approaching the creativity of Lego, and characters like Batman. My God, THE BATMAN is here! And his role is pretty constant, and of course, it does get its laughs, but never goes too far from there thankfully God, at least we don't have a tongue-in-the-cheek Batman like...that movie we don't want to remember. The story? Very well put-together to say it all. It gets thoughtful, the enough to make you think and not so much to distract you from what's on screen, so, greatly done there. Also, the movie has that special and actually touching message that helps the story; it's not there just to teach something, it is there to be a necessary part of the story, and gives it a very balanced last third. And the best of all: IT'S FOR ALL AGES! So there's plenty of stuff to the entire world.

The Lego movie surely is a worthy experience, and with all the crap this year has got for us so far, my guess it's that the good things will start with this one. It's fun, satisfying, compelling and worthy of your time and money. With almost all done right, the movie practically has no downsides, at least not to think about too much. My guess is that it will be nominated for best animated movie, let's hope for it.

Giorgio Moroder's Metropolis
½

Metropolis is the first science fiction film in history, and not only a science fiction film alone, but an epic one. Lang's original film version however got lots of its footage lost, and were long believed to be lost FOREVER. But Giorio Moroder was the first person to make an attempt to restore it and show it to new generations. But what we see is not the original version; as previously stated, much of the film was lost, case in point, the film is barely an hour and a half long, and this was in 1984. We will have to wait until 2001 to see another restoration. This version (Moroder's) is...strange. Why? Well, new color tints are added, the epic musical score by Gottfried Huppertz is replaced by pop songs of well-known artists and Moroder's synthetic score, the intertitles are replaced by sometimes bad translated subtitles and some new special effects...yeah, it's insulting to the original version. And, as a Metropolis fan that I am, I also felt insulted.

Why change the music and the colors? No reason at all, this isn't restoring a film, it's changing a film. The apocalyptic feeling of the story disappears because of this, and some of the original special effects are affected by the addition of color schemes. Also, due to the film not being restored further, much of the story is left on painful exposition by reading, and even some shitty-editing with still photos and weird zooms. And why change to a pop soundtrack? The epic orchestra was big part of the original and fits a hell of a lot better. It's like a really long music video, and Metropolis was never meant to be that. However, this version is still worth checking out. The story is barely affected, but still works, the film still feels kinda epic, and after you have watched the most restored version (the 2010 version to be precise), this is silly entertainment.

Changing a film to be more "modern" and nothing else is a sin, but this version has a charm, probably part of the charm of Lang's version, which still managed to survive even after all the changes. It's painful, but fine at the end. Either I hate this version or I simply label it as a "barely OK". It's a bunch of adequacy, pure adequacy. Not good, not bad, just the most "OK" I have seen in my life. Does it worth? Well, yeah, it's still Metropolis somehow...it's more eye-candy than a faithful look back at a classic...damn this adequacy.

Paranormal Activity: The Marked Ones
½

It tries. It tries hard to be different. It tries to do what the other 4 films haven't done. But ultimately, it succumbs to the same setting and style of the other 4 films. It's not different, it just tries. The Marked Ones alone could be the 5th film in the series, but it's too shameful for the company to entitle the movie that way, trying to make this series look fresh. It is not, it's getting way too old.

The Marked Ones is just a more deep explanation and exploitation of the setting of the third. At first, it seems different, it does play different. But as it progresses, it falls into the same clichés as the other 4 movies. Is it scary? It isn't. It's a bunch of predictable jump-scares with weak tension and, once again, a very weak resolution. And once more, it ends on an unexplained and at the same time, self-explanatory cliff-hanger that leads the story to nowhere land. Performances aren't bad, but the rest is. It goes the same ways as always and it feels more tired at the end. The worst thing is that this is only the first Paranormal Activity movie of this year, because the "real" 5 is coming months later. God, give me strength.

The Marked Ones is just another money-squash film with nothing really progressive. Even if it seems to progress the overall plot of the movie, it ends on explaining past events instead of making new ones. Why not call this the 5th movie? Money and shame, that's why. Avoid this movie, please, I beg you. I want no more Paranormal Activity movies in coming years. Please, let's make this and the next one box-office disappointments, so they end this once and for all, like the Saw series.

Yes, even the Wilhelm Scream is here.

Alien
Alien(1979)

Alien mixes space-stuff and sci-fi with horror and creates a very perfectionized movie and a true classic full of almost every possible emotion, and is just the beginning.

Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire
½

This film is brutal. This film is rude. This film is cruel. This film is great. Precious is the very hard-to-watch story that everyone talks about when referring to "Tell me again, how hard your life is?...". I was really indifferent to whatever this film's message is, because I still have in mind that this is a life that simply gets worse and worse.

I mean, Precious is a fat black girl, living in poor conditions, with one of the worst mothers of all time, an abusive father that violates her and pregnants her TWICE, with her first child being a girl named "Mongo" that has the Down syndrome. Oh, but it doesn't stop there: when everything seems to be getting good, Precious learns that she's HIV-positive...well, this kind of film boasts the "There's no God" believe in humanity. I mean, why stop there? Why didn't you decapitate her or have her also suffering cancer or even worse, why didn't you have her watch Batman & Robin? That would be the worst fate ever!

But then I realized that all the cruelty in this movie had one purpose: it boasts the film's message. The cruder the movie is, the stronger the message becomes. And, while watching the final shot of Precious walking with her two children, I realized that she still goes on, and ready to be happy even after all the bad things. That's strong cinema guys, and that's why we love it so much. Precious is harsh, but effective because of that. Give it a try; it might be a masterpiece you can't regret to have watched.

Star Trek Into Darkness
½

The worst of the Star Trek movies? Had all the Trekkies lost their minds? I believe so, since Into Darkness is pretty much one of the most likeable of the Star Trek movies. This movie is just fine entertainment: action, characters, smart dialogue and villains, thrilling scenes and references to legendary Star Trek lines and moments.

The story is good, the dialogue is impeccable, we still have some humor, there's the thrilling action scenes we all want, we have Spock kicking Khan's ass, we have amazing special effects, epic music, we have all we can enjoy about Star Trek...yet it doesn't compare to its predecessor. Don't get me wrong, this movie is great, but not as great as 2009's Star Trek. I think the previous movie had more magnificence in the overall Star Trek affair, while this one only gets to "try" to get that affair. But the biggest problem with this movie, at least the way I see it, is the third act. The fight between Spock and Khan was great, I loved it and I like everything in Star Trek that had to do with Spock, but the rest lacked sense and satisfaction on that act. The overall story was great save for the resolution. I think it was way too quick and more like a desperate last-minute maneuver to have a happy ending. The fact that Kirk was dead gave the movie a chance to be something new, but they simply applied a Deus-Ex Machina to have him back. I also didn't like how the final battle simply decided to cut-black and return when everything sort-of resolved itself. That was really spontaneous and...Lazy, yeah, that was a lazy way to get to the ending. But the rest done in Into Darkness was incredible, and thus, it is worth.

What? You thought I will bitch about the Wrath of Khan similarities? Why would I do that? I like Wrath of Khan, and...Well, wasn't that what we all wanted from this movie? To be a Wrath of Khan kinda-remake? I still think this movie is great, and I love its similarities with Wrath of Khan, I felt great. Into Darkness is not as great as the previous film, but it's still impressive, entertaining and satisfying all the way before the resolution. Another worth-seeing Star Trek film.

Star Trek
Star Trek(2009)
½

After getting through all the previous ten Star Trek films, this reboot by J.J. Abrams only got better. This new Star Trek gets everything done right: character development, special effects, story, casting, music and experience. In my personal opinion, this is my favorite of the Star Trek movies.

Why? Because it has everything I enjoy about Star Trek: strong visual effects, crisp action, charming characters, Kirk and Spock moments, smart dialogue, exhilarating space missions, a strong third act, incredible musical score and emotional resonance. This movie is all the great things Star Trek can do. It was a surprise, as the cast, by how they look doesn't seem to be able to carry with the legacy of its characters, but as the movie goes on, they nail them. I believe Chris Pine is as much Kirk as William Shatner, and when it comes to Spock, it's always a great deal to me, as he is one of my favorite characters. It was great to see not only the new Spock by Zachary Quinto (the guy from "Heroes"), but also the original Spock; yes, Leonard Nimoy is here too to please loyal fans and give a strong role in the movie. This Star Trek was simply great.

Many reboots usually don't live up, but Star Trek is just as great as the original timeline. This Star Trek or as I call it, New Star Trek expands the saga's horizons, that now can reach newcomers and those who don't know Star Trek; You don't need to be a nerd or a geek to enjoy it big time. A Star Trek film that does that, just have to be the best of all. Not only is it my favorite Star Trek film, is one of my favorite films period. Watching the old Star trek films only made this one all the more awesome. Wrath of Khan also has everything, but Abrams' Star Trek has it magnified. Yet, i can't give it a 100% because I felt some hand-to-hand combat with Nero at the climax would have been welcomed, and the new relationship between Spock and Uhura doesn't convince me, even if it's a reboot. But the rest of this film is just perfect: the action, the characters, the story, the direction, the music, all perfect. A movie I can enjoy more and more the more I watch it.

Star Trek - Nemesis

Star Trek VI was an epic finale to the original crew. Nemesis represents the finale of the Next Generation crew, and it isn't as epic. But, while many see Nemesis as the second worst Star Trek movie, I see it as a reliable and a not-so-bad Star Trek movie. But why was it so panned when it came out?

Well, maybe because as an ending, it's a bit weak. Doesn't have much emotional resonance, we don't see that far of the characters after the climax, the story never lives up to its potential, or perhaps they felt Star Trek already ran its course. Maybe, it just needed a break. Whatever the reasons, it's understandable, but Nemesis is a pretty decent action flick with very worth-seeing stuff. I liked the action scenes, specially the final act, which I actually thought was pretty damn good for an epic finale, but the epilogue scene just didn't give the same result. The sacrifice of Data was also something I liked and even felt; even if there's not much echo of it a scene after. And well, Tom Hardy is an interesting villain here. When it comes to Star Trek, the music is always to admire. Jerry Goldsmith comes back for his last Star Trek film, and it's in my opinion his best score on Star Trek, and yes, his fantastic theme is here again. Thank you, Jerry, for consistency.

Star Trek Nemesis isn't a good finale, but as a movie, it's pretty decent. Manages to have some good B-movie charms, terrific action scenes and it's highly entertaining. It's not a great goodbye, but maybe that's for the best at this point, as the saga would take a break and return in 2009, and a sequel to that movie in 2013...these movies should also be revisited here, later...

In the meantime, Nemesis is a likeable movie, just not loveable or special in comparison to other Trek movies. Remember, there's always The Final Frontier to remind you how low Star Trek can boldly go.

Star Trek: Insurrection
½

This might be the most "meehh" of the Star Trek movies. It's not terrible; it even gets to be slightly admirable when you're at the third act. But, to be honest, yes, this does feel like a TV special rather than a Blockbuster movie.

Insurrection has a weird story that doesn't make sense, forgettable characters and, even though it features several action scenes, they aren't anything special. Maybe this would have been OK if it wasn't the next movie after the awesome First Contact, but facts are facts. We have Goldsmith scoring once more, and yes, his fantastic theme is here thankfully God...but sadly it's the only thing I can remark of this movie. I'm glad I saw it, but it's just nothing special, just really average.

The only way to think of this movie as a good one is to believe that this is three episodes from the series putted together instead of a movie, then, you might found it a bit reliable. Otherwise, avoid it, it's not very exhilarating and can even get to boredom.

Star Trek: First Contact
½

One of the better Star Trek movies, especially after some shitty entries. Since Wrath of Khan, none of the other Star Trek movies managed to have that combination of magic, intelligence, action and emotional-character driven story, even if some of them (III, IV and VI) managed to be highly satisfactory nevertheless. But now, First Contact reaches that level with equal results of satisfaction.

¿Remember how in Star Trek VI, they used Shakespeare's Hamlet as a theme on the story? Well, this one approaches Melville's Moby-Dick with the same effective script method. The story at first is confusing, that is for non-Trekkie fans, but later on everything is explained, and in between we have engaging, exciting stuff to please the same non-Trekkies and transform them into fans of this fantastic universe. I liked the character development, the music by Goldsmith (who again uses his fantastic theme first heard in The Motion Picture from 1979 and again in Star Trek V ten years later), the amazing special effects, the thought-provoking themes and overall cool sci-fi stuff to please even the anti-nerds, seeking a great movie. First Contact delivers and satisfies. Yeah, i know the Borg could've just beam down to Earth and that's it, mission accomplished, "i dominate them all", but as long as they keep the emotional story high, we don't care.

What a surprise, after all, it is hard to reach something already accomplished by a prequel, but First Contact nailed it. It's one of the best Star Trek movies and overall one of the best science-fiction films I've seen in a while. Highly recommended, even if you don't know a thing from Star Trek; this movie is perfect to initiate in this universe.

Star Trek Generations

This movie can't help a new generation feel uninterested in Star Trek. Generations had the right ideas, but the wrong execution. Some emotional scenes work, but they go overlong, way overlong. The action is lackluster, the story is short, makes no sense and it's dumb, damn this movie is a mess.

This movie also has the sin of being boring. I don't think it's mere coincidence that every bad Star Trek movie is boring instead of a guilty pleasure. Generations is probably the second worst at this far of the Star Trek movies: it lacks emotional resonance, the use of Kirk at the end is lackluster (well, at this point he's really old, so...), the action is generic and short, some scenes go overlong, the music is not remarkable and the villain is forgettable. Overall, it's underdeveloped and boring.

The first movie in the next Generation fails big time. It doesn't transcend after leaving the theatre or any other place you're watching it. Pointless and forgettable, Generations is a movie that failed having all the elements to work.

Star Trek VI - The Undiscovered Country

The epic finale of the original crew. The Undiscovered Country is mostly a character-driven story that deftly blends strong performances, great special effects, exciting events, Shakespeare's Hamlet, and a freaking huge improvement over Star Trek V.

The sixth movie covers the last voyage of the original Enterprise crew and it certainly couldn't be anymore beautiful; we truly feel this last adventure as if we we're there, living this long, emotional goodbye. It doesn't have much action scenes, but that's because the movie knows the story is so strong that it doesn't need action as much as crisp intriguing story-telling, it even gets thought-provoking. And yes, i liked the lines taken from Hamlet to fit in the story.

It's good when a saga gives the best of endings, and Star Trek nailed it...with Hamlet references. Much like Wrath of Khan is a great example of how a sequel must be, The Undiscovered Country is a great example of how to end a good story...with Hamlet references. We all know, and this movie does too, that a great story deserves a great ending. The original crew has send-off, and we can feel fine...because it had Hamlet references. OK, joke's over: Star Trek VI is awesome and it's entertaining, emotional, nearly-epic and satisfying. If Star Trek V led you almost dead and hurt, VI is your revitalizing machine and your pain killer pill. This is Dr. McCoy, out.

Star Trek V - The Final Frontier
½

Wow, this was painful. The Final Frontier is a good example of why Kirk should direct starships instead of movies, or even write them. This is a dull, weak, underdeveloped and boring Star Trek film, and hard to sit through.

Mostly the first half of the movie seemed good, but as it goes on, it gets dullier and dullier, reaching a place no Star Trek movie should've gone before: BOREDOM. True, the first movie was also kinda boring, but you get to admire it a few minutes later. This one just gets more unwatchable as it goes, at the point of having really low quality special effects, that go even below a TV series standard. The special effects also lacks on the crucial moments, and when they don't lack, they suck, it's a nightmare. After a good bunch of movies, Star Trek had met the down. And it fucking sucks-ass.

Some scene gets surprisingly strong when it comes to emotional result, but the boredom and clumsyness tores it apart. Also the humor is not as funny as the previous movies. Star Trek V is said to be one of the worst, if not the worst, of the Star Trek movies; at this far, I can agree. It's below anything you could expect after many good sequels. Shame on you, Shatner, shame on you. At least Jerry Goldsmith gave his Star Trek theme back here. When I heard his theme at the beginning, I got very excited. The movie sucked, but at the end credits we hear his theme again, which resulted in a relief after too much Star Trek shit. But does the movie worth because of that? HELL NO!

Star Trek IV - The Voyage Home

Instead of an action-packed space adventure movie set in the future, we have something almost completely opposite here: it's not action, but comedy, the adventure is not in space, is on earth, and set in the present (of 1986 that is). It doesn't seem Star Trek at all, but to huge surprise, IT FREAKING WORKS!!

The Voyage Home is a sweet comedy, character driven, which for Star Trek is good thanks to the enjoyable and literally timeless characters. Spock himself returns to direct and he does an even better job than in The Search for Spock, his first Star Trek movie in the directional department. Special effects are getting old, but the use of them here is not much, thanks to the setting. The music changes composer but we still get a wonderful score to follow the story-telling. It's an emotional comedy, but never gets too cheesy or too serious; it keeps itself at the proper level of both the level of the setting and the level of Star Trek comedy. Thank God it wasn't a slapstick comedy or else...

The Voyage Home is highly recommendable and watchable: it does deliver its message and easily please all fans and movie-goers alike. One of the best Star Trek movies.

Mutant Chronicles

A very episodic movie, filled with pointless characters, bad dialogue, bad script, bad special effects, horrible GCI, terrible green screen, bad badness and really bad BAD badness.This is bad-ish movie. Also, what's up with the Parkinson camera at the action scenes? I feel like there's an earthquake everytime there's an action scene! This movie is fucking terrible.

Star Trek III - The Search for Spock
½

The Search for Spock lacks many of the things that made Wrath of Khan a masterpiece; it certainly lacks its big scope, its intelligence, its incredible villain and lacks some of the epic sense...nevertheless, i think Search for Spock is a fine Star Trek movie, a charming, satisfying and fun Star Trek movie.

There's a lot to love about this third movie: the characters are great and reach emotional status, the story, while not a big as Khan, is still pretty damn good: it's adventurous. The special effects are good for the time, the pacing doesn't bother at any moment, and even if Christopher Lloyd can't top Ricardo Montalban, he's still a pretty entertaining bad guy, goes more for villainy than an intelligent bad guy. Search for Spock is surprisingly directed by Spock itself, Leonard Nimoy, and his direction is superb, at least for his first Star Trek movie where he himself is a big part of it. Search for Spock is not superior, but is just fine.

Something bigger than Khan is hard to do, but as it goes, Search for Spock is a good underrated Star Trek movie. While is a bit disappointing that the story is tinnier than the previous two films, is not like Spider-Man 3 or Blade Trinity kind of disappointment, this movie manages to be fine, I loved it and I'll watch it a million times more every time I have a chance. A surprisingly good Star Trek movie.

Damn composer James Horner, if you're going to use your epic Wrath of Khan theme, don't wait until the end credits to do so!

Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior

While far from perfect, Mad Max 2 knows how a sequel must be, and the consensus pretty much summarizes the No.1 rule of a sequel: Bigger, faster, louder, but definitely not dumber. Mad Max 2 is all that.

Action scenes, pacing, scale, climax and filming is all done incredibly, the downside is the story: a bit tin for a movie with such ambitions and some of the acting is boring, while Gibson is excellent as Max. But still, Mad Max 2 is a good action movie of the old days, has very impressive action, better pacing than the first and surprisingly, the photography is great, maybe some of the best I have seen, at such level like in Lawrence of Arabia. The shots, angles and photography is something you don't usually give a shit in an action movie, but Mad Max 2 shines with those: the landscapes are filmed and photographed in such a way, it makes the world feel bigger and upgrades the scale of the movie, filmed almost as it was an epic. All this makes Mad Max 2 definitely worth watching at any moment.

A great example of sequel, The Road Warrior is superior to the original Mad Max, an example all sequels should follow (and had, like The Dark Knight or Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan). Is the best movie ever? No. Is it the best sequel ever? No, but is one of the best and very close. Does it worth before dying? Yes. Should I stop making questions? Yes, and stupid answers to them too. Just watch it, you won't feel bad, but proud and satisfied.

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: The Movie

For the first time in a while, there are not many words I can say about a movie. Maybe this one is too simple-minded, generic, silly, entertaining and safe, and offers nothing that deserves a spotlight outside of the amazing Turtles costumes by Jim Henson (the Muppet guy).

Yep, this movie was fun, but for those of us that had grown-up a lot, it can be way too silly, cheesy, light-hearted and even boring at times. If I had to nit-pick, I would say the action scenes were not very imaginative or special, it's simple martial-arts fighting, nothing Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon or Matrix-ish. And plus, the Turtles have no character, even if they are quite charming.

Not really a lot to say. It's not horrible or terrible, but neither too special nor highly impressive. It's simple, but maybe because it's meant to be simple, simple and fun. So yeah, this movie has its faults but also have that nostalgia charm that it's unbeatable, and there's nothing wrong with enjoying it; it's safe, but good. In a cheesy Turtle scale, I'll give it a Cowabunga rating, I guess.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
½

This is one of those films you can watch a million times and it will only get better each time. Wrath of Khan has none of the faults of the first movie and instead not only does it improves, but also evolves over the things we love about Star Trek. Strong story, great performances, great characters, great special effects, epic music and much more things to love are at hand in this sequel.

Wrath of Khan is one of the predecessors of today's ambitious blockbusters: intelligent, exciting, and exhilarating, with smart villains, with its proper action and fast-paced story-telling, with its strong character development moments. Is it the best Star Trek? It's debatable, but reaching a conclusion would be...illogical (jaja Spock reference, laugh), maybe Star Trek is a movie series were there's no best Star Trek movie, but just a bunch of incredible, enjoyable movies (like this one, the fourth one, the sixth, the eight and the two J.J. Abrams' Star Trek movies) and i guess that's what Star Trek is about: loveable adventures.

Wrath of Khan is one of the best sequels ever; it's so entertaining, likeable, amazing and simply superb. Just have in mind that the movie is so awesome, that some Trekkies actually died of emotional jeopardy and revived later by the same cause. Better fate than Spock's, eh? (jaja I'm so unfunny). Give it a try, it truly worth your time and money.

Star Trek: The Motion Picture

The famous "Motionless Picture" isn't the big epic and action packed adventure that Star Trek fans were expecting. Instead, this is an abysmally paced, slow, boring movie with little excitement and lack of the Star Trek feeling that not even the original cast can deliver here. Those shots of slow motion takes almost 50% of the total movie and the experience never pays off. Nevertheless, those shots are some great special effects, and the simple fact of having the cast from the TV series returning is a welcome detail, but these good details doesn't have a good story or action to back them up. What this movie needs to learn is that Star Trek is not 2001: A Space Odyssey. A very boring movie.

Mad Max
Mad Max(1979)
½

Mad Max is a good post-apocalyptic film with a different approach than other films also set in the same timeline. It's regarded as one of the best films out there, but, is it?

It's good, but I didn't find Mad Max that much extravagant nor the chase scenes so thrilling. Is there something I'm missing? Does it have a symbolic meaning? For me, it was just a good car-action movie. Literally, the action is only when anyone is riding either a car or mostly motorcycles, which are good, greatly filmed and well edited, but it's mostly someone reaching the car and somehow, the one on the front dies. It's either a crash or an accident, but not because someone shoots or explodes during the chases. Maybe I arrived a bit too late here or I have seen so many movies before this one which are incredible that I expected a lot from this Australian film. If it is because it actually started the over-the-top car chases, then I partially understand, but the movie still isn't great.

Mad Max is not bad, it's good, but I didn't find it sooooo great. It is crude, it involves the death by motorcycle hit of a little boy and the main character lost his humanism as the movie goes after that, it's not a happy story, it's a revenge story. Yet I've seen better.

House of the Dead

There are movies that are so bad they're good, and there are movies that are simply bad and despicable, nothing good or nothing to come back for. House of the Dead is a new level of bad; it's awful and easily hateful.

This movie is incredible awful quality: floppy filmed, poorly edited, stupid as hell, messy in EVERYTHING, low-definition, bad camera work, the most stupid dialogue ever ("You created it all so you could become immortal. Why?" "To live forever!") Full of shitty clichés, abysmal acting and poop-ish outcome.

House of the Dead is truly one of the worst films ever and I hope it goes to hell faster than Hitler. It's one of the worst experiences in movies I've had in a while.

9
9(2009)

9 is very low on the kind of emotional resonance that films like Pixar or DreamWorks usually give. However, is still visually stunning and blends subtle spectacle that entertains, but disappointment is still at hand.

The story is very simple and the revelations aren't as mystical or original, so the story is a failure. Characters have clichéd natures and some of them even get to be annoying, so characterization is another failure. Dialogue is nothing original but nothing terrible actually, so it's OK, but is predictable. The overall adventure is entertaining, but more wonder or scope would've be welcome. Animation is great, big and energetic, and some of the action scenes get very interesting, but they're nothing breathtaking. The detail of the overall visual style is great, not one single element that feels out of the movie's mood. The ending is as simple as the rest of the movie and doesn't quite feel complete. It's not a bad ending, but sure is nothing special either.

The problem with 9 is having big ambitions, but very lackluster execution to reach them. As an animated adventure is OK, but "just" OK. It's forgettable and its mere existence is barely noticeable, but it's not bad to waste time, or "put" some of your time. Not great, barely good enough, but it could have been worst.

Sin City
Sin City(2005)
½

Damn this movie is unstoppable. There's practically no rest, not even 5 minutes without someone punching, shooting or blowing things up. Sin City is a movie that offers something different for God's sake, thank you.

Sin City is merely an anthology film telling 4 stories, all of them coming to connection on a bar, but overall different. Many of those stories use supporting characters from other stories and it all comes to happen or have its origin on Basin City, or just Sin City. The movie has style, has great visuals and exploits as much as it wants from it. It's dark and crude, anything but sweet, it's cold and violent, but that's part of the fun. My problem with Sin City is how tiring it can become at times, and the action, through good, it's just people shooting and when there are punches, it's not entirely a long fight more than just mere seconds. But at least those few punches come every 5 minutes mostly, like i said, the movie never stops.

Sin City is a stylish movie with a glimpse to every movie goer. It's fun and never gets to bore, but neither gets extremely satisfying. Good movie, but not necessarily great. Fun ride for those seeking a different kind of comic book movie.

King Kong
King Kong(1976)
½

Maybe this is the origin of those remakes that change the material and thinks it can get away with it. Much like the Clash of the Titans remake or Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes remake, 1976's King Kong simply wastes a lot of its potential source material into very weak changes, bad acting and lack of any emotional resonance.

The Kong is not a very great effect, he acts like a man more than a gorilla, he looks cartoonish and we don't get attached to him, unlike the original 1933 version or the 2005 remake by Peter Jackson. Also, here Kong is treated not like magnificence, but more like the thing that "kinda" ruined a trip to an island. That is bad, since both previously mentioned versions of King Kong knows that every time the beast is on screen, there's got to be spectacle and shots to let us see his magnificence and the wonder he is supposed to be, but this one just fucked it up; how can you have a giant gorilla and not make it the most interesting thing in the movie? Worst when it's the title character! Plus, the plot before the island is just boring. They changed the ambitious director seeking an island to a man seeking for petroleum...yep, that's a lot of yawns. The characters other than Kong are not the same names and not even the same attitudes, and our main lady, probably along with Kong, the most important character in the movie is just bland and dumb, and simply unattaching. This is one of the really bad remakes.

This version of Kong mostly mocks the original instead of making a tribute to it. From changing the plot, to the lack of dinosaurs in the island, to the point where we can't feel attached to the beast or the beauty, this Kong suck monkeys. Is there anything reliable? Not really, but it's easy to tell they tried, and failed miserably.

Fantasia 2000

Fantasia 2000 isn't as artistic, ambitious or breathtaking as the 1940 original, but still has a lot of unforgettable segments, incredible animation, great music and entertains all the way, while it also provides some special hosts appearances.

The segments are kinda more epic than Fantasia, but they're not as artistic. Also, the animation don't always get along with what we're hearing. Just because they're more epic, doesn't mean they're better. Another big problem is some of the use of CGI. The animation itself is astonishing and awesome, so why have CGI? In the segment of the flying sea creatures starts great, but then I becomes a simple animated segment, only to return being an artistic one, which is good, but the fact that it got lost is still there. The final segment is the best one of the movie, but sinks in comparison with Fantasia's Ave Maria, which is one of the best things Disney has done in its entire existent.

Fantasia 2000 is, nevertheless, a very worthy sequel that entertains and still has those brilliant ideas that Disney always has. If you loved the first movie, this second one will be very enjoyable and pleasant. I'm really glad I saw it.

Fantasia
Fantasia(1940)
½

Fantasia is a superb artistic film, where the visuals, music, animation and experience is at its maximum. Thifilm is unlike anything Disney has done even today.

Fantasia blends music and images more than an actual plot or dialogue; it's mostly the orchestra presenting these segements and then some. And it's great, it works and the magic is even as it starts. However, there were two segments which i had problems with, mostly because it affected my experience on this movie. These two segemts are: The Pastoral Symphony and Dance of the Hours. The first one had imagery that's...questionable, and i'll leave it to that. The second was more strange than artistic, i mean, there's dancing Hippos with tutus, Aligators trying to get a hold on elephants, the previously mentioned Hippos and ostriches...i know it's fantasy, but that's more a mind-screw than imaginative. To redeem myself, the rest is incredible, specially these ones:
The segment "Meet the Soundtrack" was actually very charming and imaginative, and the segements "Night On Bald Mountain" & "Ave Maria" are simply some of the best Disney has done on its entire history as of 2014. Fantasia is extremely superb.

Unlike any other Disney film, Fantasia is special. Gets the artistic affair right and has one of the best movie scenes ever in animation history (the Ave Maria). A true masterpiece of music and imagery, better than any music video.

Jason Goes to Hell - The Final Friday
½

Damn, was this a lot of fun...dumb, stupid, stupid silly fun. Jason Goes to Hell gives the saga a very over-the-top, cheesy and silly ending that leads to one of the best crossovers of all time (which also turned out to be silly fun), This movie has little Jason, but lots of other fun facts.

It's fun to see the grotesque way they came up with to resurrect Jason, silly. Fun to see how everyone finally uses guns against this fucker, silly. Fun to see Jason kickin someone's ass instead of killing him faster like his previous victims, fun, silly. This movie is some of the silliest fun i've ever had. Unlike Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare, Jason goes to Hell did bring this heavily silly saga a silly end and not a shitty one, which is weird. Hands down another guilty pleasure from the Friday the 13th saga.

Jason Goes to Hell is one of the silliest entries in the series, but also one of the most fun to watch. It's so bad it's good. This leads almost right away to Freddy vs Jason, which is good, seeing how the saga neede some kickin' ass Jason. Fun movie with terrible results.

Friday the 13th Part VIII - Jason Takes Manhattan

Jason Takes Manhattan? Jason Takes A Boat is a more proper title. This other installment in the long creatively dead series is, let's say everybody: done this, been there, seen it. It's all the same stuff, only more boring. The budget is also low, so it's bad quality assurance. The franchise is already dead since some sequels ago, so I was not entirely surprised by how bad this resulted.

Just to sum-up this movie in a nutshell, the acting is horrible, the teenagers are even dumber, the characters have no character or development at all, the deaths are bland, there's little to no blood and Manhattan is only there at the last 20 minutes, with 1 minute of it on Time Square and the rest in the most boring parts of the incredible city. It's like being in front of the White House and film the streets instead.

Jason Takes a Boat, huh, i mean, Manhattan is one of the worst entries of the series, only behind Jason X. Avoid this film, there's nothing it can offer. Even accepting that this saga is dead doesn't make the movie easier to watch. It's boring, tiring and pointless.

Friday the 13th Part 3
½

Wow, the Friday the 13th series already ran out of energy with this one. This third movie has even less plot than the others, it takes way too long for something to happen, it has many fake tension moments, pointless characters, undeveloped characters, horrible special effects, misuse of annoying 3D, bad dialogue, unconvincing acting, dumb realization, little on-screen Jason and overall, IT'S BORING!!!

Well that's a letdown. At this point, this series has hitted every spot except the right one. This movie is one of those that never has potential and runs mostly on auto-pilot. It's just lifeless (how ironic that the movie feels more dead than Jason's slashed victims) and the epilogue it's heavily confusing, if not repeated from the other two movies. This movie is so far one of my least favorites from the series, and i still have 7 more movies to watch from this series (Freddy vs Jason and Jason X have already been reviewed) and for what i've heard, it just can get worse, no more (or less). Well, at least this movie introduces that famous hockey mask that Jason always wear, and plus, this movie is not necessarily the worst ever, so i'm just gonna say, this movie is unwatchable for those not familiar with the series. Watch it by your own risk.

Brazil
Brazil(1985)

This review has my opinion on the Uncut version (142 minutes) and the "Love Conquers All Version" (94 minutes).

Uncut Version:

One of the strangest movies I have ever seen, yet that doesn't mean it's one of the worst. Brazil is the crisp and imaginative story of Sam Lowry and how he unfortunately of fortunately gets involved into a system error that will ultimately have a lot of shit happening. It boasts great visuals, dark comedy, and fantasy battling a mediocre futuristic reality.

Being a British film, it means it will have a lot of things going on at the same time, both in the foreground and the background. It's hard to follow and that alone can drive audiences away, but if you stay a little while more, you'll see this is worth it. The story is original, the special effects are incredible, the performances are superb and the story-telling is fast and practically unstoppable. There's one downside and it's the romantic plot with character Jill. While Sam tries to find her, it's good development, but after both finally see each other face-to-face, it goes a bit faster and less caring.

Brazil is confusing and uneven, even strange, but is also well-done, imaginative and wonderful. It went overlooked when it came out in the U.S. Let us undo that and watch it if you have the chance. A visually striking movie. This version deserves a 100%.

Love Conquers All Version:

It's amazing how editing a film can change even its personality. This 94 minute comercial version of Brazil has very inconsistent editing, poorly dubbed voice-overs, and deletes almost all of Sam's dream sequences, which are my favorite parts of the movie. It was going OK before the "New Happy Ending" that this version has. The ending is poorly dubbed, poorly filmed and poorly edited, and also, poorly executed. It's rushed, makes no sense and makes the movie feel empty. Yes, the dark-note ending is far more sentimental. It's a shame, but it is interesting. It's interesting how editing a film can result in a change from one of the best films to one of the most average ones. This version still has its visuals, but without a proper story-telling and a proper ending to it, it doesn't worth. Watch the 132 or 142 minute version instead. This version gets a 50% if it could have its own Tomatometer.

Friday the 13th Part VII - The New Blood
½

Pretty much the same stuff as always: Jason is implausibly back, lots of dumb teenagers, which also means a lot of kills and sex, lots of sex and lots. Lots of extremely under-developed characters...actually, THERE'S NO CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT ANYMORE! This formula will just always be there, the series is self-aware and will never take risks, at least not smart ones. But that's not the worst, because along with all that, we have a new main character that fights Jason with Stephen King's Carrie's clone. Literally, this new character has telekinetic powers and shit. She's also blonde, socially awkward, mentally repressed and moves things with her eyes, yeah, IT IS LITERALLY CARRIE VS JASON!!!!!...yet that makes it entertaining.

From all the Friday the 13th movies, this is the very first one I can legitimately consider as "it's so bad it's good" kind of movie. Weird thing how many say the previous film, Jason Lives, is a fan favorite and not this one that actually has a more constant killing and practically never slows down. It also has the laziest of the resolutions so far. This Carrie-clone person literally brings his already dead-father to live to kill Jason, AND HE'S BEEN DEAD FOR LIKE MORE THAN A DECADE!!!! Well, this series is not only getting extremely tired and repetitive, but also sillier. It's weird, but in my opinion, The New Blood, the 7th entry in the series already, is the first one that actually kept me entertained through the entire movie. The others usually go very slow and slows down even more after the middle, but this one was more quicker and interesting. It's a guilty pleasure to say the most.

The series has run out of ideas at such point that now they're putting a carbon-copy of Carrie as the most reliable thing in the series. That is the best sign that shows this series is pretty fucked-up already. At least, it tried to have fun with itself. The series is long dead, but my guess it's that from here on now, it will be pure silly entertainment. Fuck logic, fuck consistency, fuck Jason, and everything else; this series is officially dead and works only by silly tracks. Period.

OK, that Personal Penis Enlarger joke was pretty funny.

Lawrence of Arabia
½

An epic I was hyped to see. Lawrence of Arabia is one of those films which the size of ideas and the scope of them are just HUGE. The film takes several details of many movies, but with a greater potential: there's a lot of actors, a lot of story-scenarios, a lot of landscapes, a lot of story, a lot of ambitions, and of course, a lot of runtime. Many call Lawrence "the epic of epics"...yeah, it is a great epic, but...I have seen others with greater size and scope, like The Ten Commandments. Don't get me wrong, this is still a great epic, one of the greatest, but i don't think this IS the greatest of all. We all have opinions, and mine is that Lawrence is just "close" to be the best epic.

For what I heard, the depiction of Lawrence is barely half-accurate. Isn't that supposed to be the center of this movie? Other problems I have is that the story, through understandable, is convulted. Sure this story is based on real events, but a movie is done so it can be told easily, not more confusing. Another problem I have with this movie is that it doesn't let us breathe on these events the enough. I mean every time Lawrence is on something, it does well on leaving us some landscapes and crisp explanation to be connected, but this is only in the first part of the movie. The second part seems bothered with showing more up-close Lawrence on it. It's inconsistent, and I would've had a much better experience if the second part could also let us breathe on itself. But the rest done in this movie is just perfect.

Lawrence of Arabia is a great epic, even if some of the depictions of the title character are questionable; it never stops being a wonderful, big, brilliant epic. A movie every cine-phile must see.

Likes for killing. Because fuck you guys.

Metropolis
Metropolis(1927)

The first feature length movie of the sci-fi genre.
Metropolis is a visionary film that executes all its ideas in very impressive ways, taking elements such as religion, faith, technology, romance, ambition, modernized slavery and prophesies to timeless effect.

We found ourselves in probably the first dystopian future in movie ever, and this is as far in the past as 1927. Metropolis uses imagery and ideas that will later inspire many movies, such as Blade Runner and many others on its terms of androids, socially mediocre mankind and the latter divided heavily between all-time workers and politically-powerful people. Much like many silent movies, Metropolis works as a huge symphony too, in which the advanced civilization is still no reason not to have an epic orchestra playing. Metropolis is a landmark that unfortunately went cut and overlooked.

With its glimpses of romance too, Metropolis is also one of the most complete science-fiction films ever, and its magnificence can be compared with those of today. Impossible to hate.

Back in 1927, being a male and friendly to your male friends meant a heavy and trusted friendship, today, is just being gay. Standards change, but this movie only change to get better and better as time passes.

Melody (S.W.A.L.K.)
½

Bizarre, uneven and weird, but also charming, touching and gently funny, Melody is a take back to the 70's, and places kids problems, kids psyche and all the things a kid really does...i think. My problem with this movie is not because it's dark, i like dark kids movies, but the problem here is the weird characters, they're hard to gravitate and like. Also some of the things the kids does is...rare. However, Melody is still enjoyable, but not a true masterpiece, but hell, it doesn't need to be one. It's just a weird romance story and accomplishes that fact. Uneven, but fun.

Frozen
Frozen(2013)
½

Another great hit by Disney that manages to be highly touching, emotional and full of memorable songs. Frozen is one of the best that Disney has offered in his new 3D-only era, featuring the classic cheesy charm that it offers, but maybe it's a bit too cheesy. Not that i want dark tones in this movie, it's just that it has some annoying tones at times.

Our princess Anna is the classic "I'll fall in love tonight" girl that Disney always offers, but this one goes a bit beyond that type. Also some of the first songs and some of the performances of the same songs are a bit too cheesy, even by Disney standards, but still, the songs are great, catchy and will be remembered for all time. The characters are likeable, the score by Christophe Beck is also great, the animation is again very alive and the overall story is well told. Not the best Disney film but surely very close to be one, maybe in coming years.

Frozen is a movie that we all will watch in the holiday season of each year from now on, it's charming, splendid and superb, with incredible songs. Another great movie that makes us forget the horror of "Planes".

Yeah, i have to say it: I saw Frozen today. There, Christopher Lloyd can be proud.

V/H/S/2
V/H/S/2(2013)
½

Sharing the same affair but not the same mistakes, this sequel to V/H/S fares better, but feels as satisfying the enough much like the first and not entirely superior. The image quality only changes in the frame narrative, while the other tapes share a similar HD definition...it's hard to believe is actual VHS footage, but is passable. Once again an anthology film, this movie will be reviewed individually by its tapes.

Tape 49/Frame Narrative

This keeps the movie on one linear story before and after each tape. It isn't very scary, but it is very interesting. The end does have strength and leaves the movie on a weird sarcastic note, but manages to feel satisfying. Great improvement over the first movie's frame narrative.

Phase I Clinical Trials

Instead of slow build-up, this tape goes straight to the point very fast and the scares are constant. It isn't very compelling but keeps the entertainment high. Good but running mostly on auto-pilot.

A Ride in the Park

A very interesting look into the zombie genre. We see the story of a man who was attacked by zombies and later becomes one of them, all while his head-camera records everything. Well filmed, well executed, and the resolution changes horror to a more touching and sentimental affair. Yeah, a zombie tape that becomes emotional in a very plausible way. This one felt very compelling and might be the best tape of the movie...maybe.

Safe Haven

This might be the most "pro" of the tapes, as it changes between many scenarios, tells a hell of a story (literally) and approaches its demonic and mysterious elements as much as possible. It is frightening, scary and extremely compelling. Along with A Ride in the Park, it might be the best tape. Everything with this tape is right, and scary, of course.

Slumber Party Alien Abduction

The weakest of the tapes on this movie. After two great compelling tapes, we have this one that's more simple and less scary. It does have aliens, but it's mostly just people running away from them. It isn't compelling, not as complex as Safe Heaven or as well executed as A Ride in the Park, but manages to be entertaining. It's the final tape before the end of the frame narrative, so being the weakest tape, it isn't a great good-bye.

V/H/S/2 fares better and have better tapes with a better execution; everything is better here, as any sequel should be. An example is that the first one was criticized for its length, but this one is shorter and straighter to the point. Rarely a superior sequel happens, but V/H/S/2 succeeded. Apparently the makers of this did read the complaints about the first movie in order to improve on this one. A lesson for al filmmakers dudes. A life lesson.

But then again, each tape just NEEDS to have a sex or nude scene. Damn, if you're going to improve in the sequel, improve everything!

Face/Off
Face/Off(1997)
½

Overblown, cheesy, over-the-top, silly and dumb, but also fun, exhilarating, entertaining, satisfying and enjoyable because of it. The sillier it gets, the funnier it gets. Face/Off is a John Woo film after all, so of course there's a lot of over-the-top-ness all around, but very enjoyable.

Travolta and Cage are game, and literally play each other here, which gives a lot of over-acting fun and it's hilarious at the same time it can be touching when necessary. The action is the classic John Woo standard: stylish, full and overblown fun. Music is kind of forgettable but very good; special effects are great, even if the final action scene leaves the use of stunt-doubles that doesn't look like Travolta or Cage very obvious. The story and its concept of facial change are implausible, but given the tone of the movie, it fits correctly.

Face/Off is a fun movie that I overlooked for many years; hell, the waiting was worth it. It's pure fun by all means and everybody can like it. A solid, silly action/thriller film that's unintentionally hilarious.

An orgasm of pure exaggeration.

The Fountain
The Fountain(2006)
½

Hardly understandable and easily despicable, The Fountain is a movie purely for the more deep-minded people. The Fountain is one of those movies that try to be mystical and cryptic, putting elements such as religion, eternity, infinity and so forth. It has done things like 2001 or Blade Runner: it mostly seems to be putting many random things that actually connect with each other. Those movies never get quite a great reception. At least not in the first 10 years after its release.

The Fountain tells 3 stories that hardly connect each other in a runtime of less than two hours long. There's a lot of match cuts, change of tones, change of atmosphere and it gets very confusing. What does it want to tell? I don't know but part of me understands it, and another part just didn't care. If there's something we can all agree, is that the visual effects (surprisingly not done by CGI) are great. The rest is left in pure open interpretations. What I can tell it's that is definitely about infinity and rebirth, but what I can't do is explain why. I liked it, but still, I don't think is a great movie. Probably it needs some years to become a underrated classic, but in my personal opinion, it doesn't have the focus or crisp narrative of other movies of this kind, like the previously mentioned 2001 by Stanley Kubrick.

In the end, The Fountain is ambitious, but never seems to reach such level of greatness. It isn't sharp, but I recommend to give it an opportunity, who knows, maybe you'll find something I missed to make it better, or worse.

Monkeys with tumors. Now that's cruel.

Clash of the Titans

I can watch this movie many times only to laugh about it. The story has no sense, it has inconsistent following, quick and unreachable narrative, clumsy characters and lackluster action scenes. I was expecting a much better remake of a classic, but i guess the studio said: "Good remake? No, that's what they're expecting us to do..."

The worst detail of Clash of the Titans is the script: flawed, full of clichés, quick but not learner, extremely straight to the point, lack of emotional development, etc.; it just can't keep up with itself. I can summary the bad quality of its script by just saying that the script is so bad it doesn't even bother in naming all the characters, just barely. Special effects are great, when it comes to the Scorpions, the size of the Kraken, the Gods, the Witches, that is OK, what is not is the design and execution of most of them: The Scorpions are the best approached in the movie, and it's one of the first action scenes when the tin plot is happening; Calibos have a couple of good action scenes but the design is lackluster, and drowns in comparison with the original Calibos from the 1981 version; Medusa's design here is way too fashion, they even get as far as to put a fashion model's face into it, while the original was straight-ugly, but also terrifying. And the Kraken? Yeah, the size is good, but the design and execution is bland, it doesn't even look like a sea monster of anything from Greek mythology. However, i thought the Pegasus looked better than the original, the black color made him look cooler. In terms of design and execution, is hit and miss.

The overall action scenes are quick and most of them are replaced by vague and drown-out dialogue, which never lives up and end up being bare excuses for quick character placement instead of development. NONE of the characters reaches an emotional attachment, but what can you expect from characters which names we can't even remember. There's like a total of 3 reliable action scenes, the rest is average stuff. But what about the scenarios? Well, to be fair, those are awesome and even epic. The environment, the atmosphere, the size of the green-screen locations, it's all truly epic. The score by Ramin Djwadi (Iron Man, 2008) is not Oscar-worthy but manages to be epic too, specially the main theme "There Is A God In You", helps the epic feeling of the sets and is the only emotional resonance we can recall from the movie, because the characters surely can't. And as previously said, the special effects are great. But what is the best detail about this movie? My guess, based on my many returns to this movie, is the epic size and scope it couldn't reach, but you can feel is there. There's something about this movie i like a lot, it's so bad it's good, it's so drown-out is kinda epic. It's so lackluster it entertains. A perfect example is the climax with the Kraken at Argos: It's a demigod in a black Pegasus, flowing in the air while a giant Kraken pursues him, while excerpts of Hades also pursues him, while on the open sea in the middle of the city of Argos while a Princess is hanging on the air outside of the most epic Greek dome you'll ever see while the demigod tries to get Medusa's head back...if a videogame had that as the final boss scenario, it would be the epicest game ever. True, it doesn't worth it, but damn, they were close to be epic.

Clash of the Titans fails big time, but much like many bad movies, there's something loveable about it. It's hard to find, but it's there. It's a lackluster epic, but the word epic stays there. I have watched it a million times already, and I'm sure I'll watch it a million times more.

Bubo...

Rise of the Planet of the Apes
½

After many failures (and 10 years of absence), 20th Century Fox decided to re-start the Apes franchise and deliver another more accurate way to start the Apes story anew. It certainly couldn't be better. Rise of the Planet of the Apes is a fresh, touching, interesting, action-packed and stylish return to the long-running franchise. This movie is so good that all the bad taste from Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes simply disappears.

Rise tells the story of the apes going on a rampage against humans. Our main character is Caesar, played superbly by Andy Serkis. Caesar is well developed and he's what keeps the movie in a very interesting mood, we care about what will he do, we care what is happening to him, we care about him pretty much. Watching the Apes revolting against the humans is just awesome and better put together than in Conquest of the Planet of the Apes, which was the 4th movie in P.Jacobs franchise of the Apes and had a similar premise: Caesar leads a revolt against humans. The other characters (other than the interesting Apes) are also very useful to the story: James Franco plays Will Rodman, the human that's more attached to Caesar than any other. We also have David Oyelowo as Steve Jacobs, who later becomes the film's most cruel human, and yes, he is a black man. What is up with the Apes movies having something against black men? In the original film, they shot a black man first, in Beneath the Planet of the Apes (the second film), the weird underneath black human is the first of its race killed and the movie credits him as "Negro". With that, I'm set. But still, the movie itself tells what it needs. This movie felt so great, everything was wrote right, was done right and executed right. This movie is all right.

Rise of the Planet of the Apes is the beginning of a new Apes franchise and surely looks to be awesome. Let us hope for no drown-out sequels.

John Lithgow didn't do a comedic role here? A touching one? Well, that's a first.

Planet of the Apes

This new Planet of the Apes is one of those lazy remakes: it does everything it wants in a very rushed and simple way, and it does nothing that the 1968 original did right. I do wonder how Tim Burton could make such a mess out of the Planet of the Apes. I guess we can blame some of the writers, as two of them worked on another big lazy and rushed movie: Superman IV. But still, how come Burton thinks a script like this one could be the best for a remake of a classic? This is a big misfire, a letdown and a self-indulgent movie that cares little about its uneven tone and structure.

We have a great cast here, but surprise, there's Tim Burton and her Helena Bonham Carter, but not Johnny Depp. Instead we have Mark Wahlberg, who does a decent job, but his character barely has any emotional resonance, ultimately nothing compared to Taylor, played by Charlton Heston in the 1968 original. The rest of the cast is top-notch, but their characters have little to workout. It doesn't help that every single character uses pure exposition to tell their stories: they tell what happened, instead of why it happened. And the movie sadly has exposition as the mechanism to tell the whole movie. The story itself is nothing special, it's very simple and the twists at the end are weak and self-explanatory, but cryptic. It's like the movie is always trying to end as quickly as possible, but the thing that made the first movie so great is the build-up of every single part of the story, until we finally see the truth at the very end: all build up lead to that. Here, it's only to make the story end, no build-up, no intensions of leaving a lasting impression, no intensions of care the bit less about the original. It deftly destroys the legacy of the Apes. In the original, it made sense that the humans were slaves, they were dumb, and they couldn't even speak or think. Here, it doesn't make sense, as the humans can talk, can think, THEY EVEN CAN FIGHT AGAINST THESE APES! Seriously, how did the Apes conquer earth when the humans had all the weapons at their hands? That is dumb, insulting to our intelligence and an insult to the original. Plus, the Apes are also dumb too. Auch, that hurts. There's one scene, when the humans are escaping, we see a bunch of apes doing the stupidest things: about to have sex, one of them is using a wig, another one is putting flowers around him...man, it ridiculous and shameful, that IS a big insult for the original Planet of the Apes. Plus, the ending is very...mixed. So much going on and so little explained...many declares this ending as one of the most horrible, but i didn't find it that bad. Surely a sequel was planned at the time, and plus, after almost two hours of shitty things, what other kind of ending could you expect?

And yet, I found this movie admirable. It does have some B-movie elements and nice visuals. I like B-movie elements and visuals. It's the same case with the Clash of the Titans remake: I like it because it does everything wrong, but in a semi-epic way. I liked that they make the Apes characters still the most interesting in the movie, I liked the fight at the end, I liked the tone they gave to this movie, I liked the sets, I liked the short and fast-paced story-telling, I liked those make-up techniques, even if the female apes look very unconvincing, I liked the score by Danny Elfman, I liked the environment of this movie, I liked how they wanted this to be an action packed movie, damn this movie is full of my most basic movie instincts. I recognize why the hate, I sort of do too, but I also love it because of that, it's a guilty pleasure to say the least.

When it comes with the other Planet of the Apes movies, this one is the second worst; the first is Beneath the Planet of the Apes, which is a bigger misfire. I'm sure I will return to watch this crap over and over. Curse my likes for B-movie charms.

Oh, Tim Burton...man, you made Batman! What the hell happened?!

HAPPY HOLDIAYS REVIEWS PART 20 (FINAL): Planet of the Apes (2001)

Battle For The Planet Of The Apes

This isn't a necessary movie, the story itself just covers one of many battles of the story of the Apes, but nothing that takes character development or multiple plotlines coming to a great conclusion, instead goes for this one linear plot that goes on auto-pilot. Battle for the Planet of the Apes is the final chapter in the original series produced by P. Jacobs, and surely it's weak, it's redundant, generic and nothing proud of the original Planet of the Apes, but in comparison with other Apes sequels, this one is pure mindless fun.

Roddy McDowall is back as Caesar, so is Natalie Trundy as Lisa and Austin Stoker as MacDonald (no, this isn't obvious product placement). All these actors do a well job, even if the script does nothing besides telling their part in the story, nothing complex or significant. Actually, even the new characters have nothing special, they're just extras in the plot and their participation is barely unforgettable. The story is weak, all they do is, go to a city, the city pursuits them, they battle, it ends; but it's fast-paced, short and fun, even if it does feel tedious at times, specially telling human characters scenes. Overall, it offers absolutely nothing new, but I don't think that was the movie's objective. The objective was one last movie, and that's it. If it were something special, then this wouldn't be the last chapter, it would surely spawn another and another until they really have nothing. But this is already a last gasp in the creator's minds: there's nothing else to tell, and they knew it, so they created this simplistic yet fun last breath of the Apes saga.

Battle for the Planet of the Apes is simplistic, mindless, needless and lacks any ambition, but its way better than the second and fourth films, especially the second film, which was a complete disaster, and do I have to remind anyone of that horrible ending? Ugh. Battle is careless when it comes to do something new, but on itself, it does take care of all it can offer: a battle. It wasn't epic, it wasn't necessary at all, but it could have been worse. It could have lacked any battle at all and end suddenly out of nothing...you know, like the second movie, Beneath the Planet of the Apes! Battle is fun, and a calmed good-bye and repeat for the saga.

They think the Forbidden City was radioactive, ha! They should see where they filmed The Conqueror with John Wayne. Dumbasses.

HAPPY HOLIDAYS REVIEWS PART 19: Battle for the Planet of the Apes (1973)

Conquest Of The Planet Of The Apes
½

This wasn't good, but certainly isn't horrible. Conquest is far better than the second and has a lot of material to work with; the main problem isn't even at the end, but at its beginnings.

First of all, the film takes place in the worst place any movie can be: Asshole Town. That is always an automatic fail. I mean, everybody has to be rude and mindless about violence. I swear, if I say "hello", these guys from the movie would be like: "What's the matter with you?!" Plus, it's an anti-ape kind of movie. The other fail are the villains: they're forced, and I mean very forced, a reminiscence of the Asshole Town bullcrap. The other fail is the editing: it's very sporadic at times. We can say this movie does tell the story it wants, but in a very lazy and average form. The good thing comes after the middle of it, suddenly all the fails disappear and the movie is all about apes beating the shit out of humans, and that's cool. Plus, we have returner Roddy McDowall playing Caesar, a very reliable character to be honest.

Overall, Conquest of the Planet of the Apes is not the best of the series, it has annoying stuff at the first half, but that half is easy to survive, and the other half is very enjoyable, plus it comes full circle with the first, so we can say it did try to be good. It did try. Not the best Apes movie, but not one of the worst either, just an entertaining and reliable one.

Seriously humans, you need to know how to use guns. The apes learned pretty quickly. Yeah, I'm with the apes this time, thank you.

HAPPY HOLIDAYS REVIEWS PART 18: Conquest of the Planet of the Apes (1972)

Escape from the Planet of the Apes
½

After a very empty and drown-out sequel, Planet of the Apes finally gets a worthy continuation that manages to clean the franchise's name after Beneath the Planet of the Apes tore it down with a half-ass ending...no, actually it was a whole ass ending. But that only glorifies this one more, as it tells once more a very intriguing, touching, progressive and correctly told story, even if it is a little sad and hard to sit through because of it.

The story certainly is more character driven and more caring than the previous one, but also tries to not go through the same plot points of the first, and instead goes for an actual continuation. The best thing is the characters, being this a character driven movie, is really important. Thankfully God, we have Cornelius and Zira as the main characters, and they are as much loveable as always. The music is once again, experimental, so it's hard to understand why certain clue is played during certain scenes, but ultimately is a great score. The makeup still soars and the dialogue is smart and the movie overall entertaining, so there's little to bitch about in Escape from the Planet of the Apes. It's one of those sequels that are surprisingly good and very enjoyable.

Escape from the Planet of the Apes might be the best sequel of the original series, and that is a huge relief. After all, this is one of those rare cases were the third movie isn't the suckiest of all. It's a worthy, entertaining, well put-together movie that might be way too underrated among audiences. It soars, and we have to love it for that.

Oh, Dr. Milo...the writers didn't even give you a chance, did they?

HAPPY HOLIDAYS REVIEWS PART 17: Escape from the Planet of the Apes (1971)

Beneath The Planet Of The Apes
½

The movie starts with the ending of the first, a great way to save money eh? Then we cut to an implausible second ship that arrived, and yes, we met our new main character: Brent, or as i like to call him, "Not Taylor". He's not as charming as Charlton Heston, nor is he as interesting. He pretty much goes through the same things that Taylor went through in the first, making it very repetitive. The change comes when we discover what's beneath of the planet: weirdos that worship an atomic bomb. Their powers are actually very interesting, but they use all of the interesting stuff in the first minutes we see them. From there on, they only do boring prayers before being easily killed by the apes. We then come back to Taylor and a very entertaining fight between him and Not Taylor. After that, the rest seems like "OK" to be honest, but the last 10 minutes of the movie are the worst: everybody gets instantly killed, including our beloved characters from the first, with no time to react (talking about us, the audience) and everything suddenly cuts to and end and a shitty voice-over epilogue. We came from one of the best endings in cinema history (the first movie) to one of the worst (this piece of shit). What a cop-out.

Beneath the Planet of the Apes is one of those shitty sequels that do everything its prequel did great in the worst way possible. The story itself seems to belong to a TV series, not a movie. Beneath the Planet of the Apes? What apes? The story doesn't even approach the apes that much; mostly it's only Not-Taylor and Nova. This was very disappointing and I can even get as far as to say i hate it. This is one of the biggest shameful sequels ever, to one of the greatest films of all time. A movie that offers nothing but drown-out entertainment and a horrible ending.

There's also Not-Cornelius.

HAPPY HOLIDAYS REVIEWS PART 16: Beneath the Planet of the Apes (1970)

The Raid: Redemption
½

If you can survive the simple plotting, bad lip sync, terrible voice acting, purple/violet dread skin color, unfitting videogame-like music, unnecessary crude-language, implausibility & lack of humor, then The Raid Redemption is a highly entertaining, fast-paced and brutally fun adventure for a day where there's nothing else to do.

Sure I say the voices are terrible, but that's only in the dubbed version, which I recommend you not to watch, instead go for the Indonesian version with English subs. So, to sum in this film, it's implausible, videogame like storytelling, unfitting cool music, lack of any suitable story and average performances, the rest is pure fun, brutal, extreme, sick-to-your-ribs, fast-paced bloody action. That alone is enough to hold up the entire movie, that thankfully God it's not very long. It gets tiring at times, but once the action is on, the rest doesn't matters, its pure fun for your basic action-hungry instinct.

Not much to say but give it a chance, the action is so fast and brutally satisfying that you may not regret watching it. All it leaves with you is pure violence, and you'll love it.

Did they actually use the Wilhelm scream? Or is it only in the American dub?

HAPPY (Bloody) HOLIDAYS REVIEWS PART 15: The Raid: Redemption (2012)

Planet of the Apes

This movie was a surprise for me. I knew it was going to be good, probably even great, but not this high level of incredibleness...yeah, let's just say it was an unforgettable experience, because this film tells a hell of a story: a world gone upside-down. And it does exploit every aspect of it. Planet of the Apes is one of the greatest science-fiction films that also has intelligent dialogue, clever development and some thought-provoking stuff that really lives up, along with a twisted and incredible ending. Apes are great.

The performances are also outstanding, featuring big names like Charlton Heston, Roddy McDowall & Kim Hunter. All the characters play a part in the story, strong enough to actually be necessary to the story: there's not one single pointless character. The make-up...my God, it's the best. These prosthetic makeup techniques by John Chambers make the apes as most plausible as possible, helping the experience of the story. Thanks to that incredible makeup, we get sucked-in this alternative future very easily, thus the story is accurate to this kind of plotting. Is there a downside? Yes, and it's the score by Jerry Goldsmith. It's not bad, but experimental music is hard to gravitate, and Jerry does that often in movies, it's the same case as in First Blood: the music doesn't fit in some key scenes. But still, that is a minimal failure in contrast to the rest that this movie offers: a thought-provoking movie that's far more incredible than you might be thinking.

Planet of the Apes is a movie that surprises a lot, even today. A must-see to all movie goers and sci-fi lovers.

Yep, apes can kiss too.

HAPPY HOLIDAYS REVIEWS PART 14: Planet of the Apes (1968)

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
½

I don't gravitate towards westerns, of all kinds. Sometimes I expect much gunfight and that's it. Of course, I later realized that the westerns made of pure gunfight are the worst. That's why The Good, The Bad and the Ugly isn't pure guns, there's also some characterization, story-telling and entertainment. Maybe I need some time to actually re-evaluate it correctly, but so far, I think is very solid, but not entirely perfect or near it.

I didn't find the story as "compelling", but it was well developed. It's mostly character-driven, and, in today fashion, we can say it plays like an RPG: characters go many other places, facing many dangers, escaping, getting caught, escaping again and getting separated and reunited over and over, all before reaching the location they're supposed to be in the first place. It's fun. The performances are great, as expected. Pacing can be a problem but not in the level of The Hobbit. Overall it's a great movie, but I don't think it's that perfect. The Bad stays out of the movie for large periods, and I don't know what was going on most of the time, it constantly changes tone and objectives. It's hard to stay tuned, thus it affect the experience. Not that I think it's overrated, but I have seen better westerns, like The Magnificent Seven, which isn't an "spaghetti", but surely it's a western.

Maybe i need to see more westerns, but in the meantime, this third movie in the "Dollars Trilogy" is a classic every movie-goer should know, it has great characters, great story-telling, great crafting and the classic score by Morricone. An entertaining and epic western.

I stay with the rope.

HAPPY HOLIDAYS REVIEWS PART 13: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (1966)

King Kong
King Kong(1933)

Who doesn't know Kong? Thanks to this film, everybody does. The idea of a gigantic Kong is always interesting. Imagine this idea as new and groundbreaking, developed in the 30's. Then it's easy to understand why it's such a classic. King Kong is the classic story about the beast falling in love with a blonde woman, and in a world where he is always misunderstood, because everybody thinks this beast has no soul. It can be both a sad and terror film, but always a good one.

The performances are over-the-top, but this is the 30's, so it can go on without any bothering. Nevertheless i am annoyed by the female lead: all she does is screaming, but ultimately delivers the character we want to take away from the monster. I loved Robert Armstrong as Carl Denham, he's a fun and likeable character. The musical score is great too, even if I can't take it seriously at times and the size and scope of this film is impressive for the 30's, it's unbelievable. The special effects are laughable today, but back then, it was the most expensive and most formidable way to create monsters. Sure you never believe Kong or any other beast is there, sure some human characters are replaced by dolls when they fall, sure the beasts move like clapboard, sure that Kong's face close-up is hilarious, sure it all leads to hilarious effect, but all come also with a bit of impressionism; as you laugh your ass out of the special effects, you also know they are impressive for a film this old. And if it is to help the movie, then it's OK.

King Kong is classic and hilarious, fun but also emotionally resonant, leaving you to feel sorry for the beast, cause...damn, it's a giant monster with a heart that gets killed because he felt in love. A classic story that still lives-up today.

Stop-Motion everywhere!

HAPPY HOLIDAYS REVIEWS PART 12: King Kong (1933)

Blade Runner
Blade Runner(1982)
½

Hardly an understandable film. But i have an affair for films with a cryptical meaning, such as The End of Evangelion, 2001: A Space Odyssey, and of course, Blade Runner. This classic sci-fi film isn't as action packed as I thought, or as thrilling or intriguing, or even simply-constructed. Nope, Blade Runner was ultimately a sci-fi thriller and drama film, yet that also works thanks to a well scripted and well executed story, and handy direction by Ridley Scott. Blade Runner is an ambiguous, but still remarkable movie.

The story is actually very simple when you think about it, it's just a Blade Runner doing his job, nothing else. But the fact is that characters deliver their part that affect this Runner's mission, creating a "side-story" that somehow takes over the main plot. The complexity of the Nexus 6 reploids, the complexity of Rachel and even the main character Deckard and his complex mind and psychology...it's all very interesting and forms a solid sci-fi drama thriller without giving out too many answers. It's confusing, and there's a total of seven versions of this film, which makes it all the less easy to understand (i watched the "Final Cut" version). But i like when films makes you think, leaving you confused even if you loved it. It's like the movie doesn't end until you figure out your own conclusions, this is a great way to please audiences at the same time it leaves "movie-homework", probably the only homework we like to do. Blade Runner works in whatever way it is working. An idea that works because you don't quite get it completely.

Blade Runner was confusing and uneven, but also solid and well done. It's not action packed, but the drama holds up. It's not clear, but you like it that way. It's a mess you'll get to love sooner or later, for better and for worst.

When you think about it, Deckard manipulated and violated Rachel...i guess it isn't a crime since no law even in 2019 says that it's against the law to violate reploids...that's gross.

HAPPY HOLIDAYS REVIEWS PART 10: Blade Runner (1982)

2001: A Space Odyssey

December 18th, 2013. Wednesday. I write this down, cause it's the date when i saw for the first time this masterpiece in cinema: 2001: A Space Odyssey by Stanley Kubrick. The film takes many mythological aspects of mankind to create a journey into the infinite and the unknown, with classical fitting music and use of incredible special effects. 2001 is a reminder of why i love movies: they are mere experiences. And this is a hell of an uneven and incredible experience, reflecting our own kind and the place we might have in the universe. After all, we are just tiny in size when in comparison with the infinite, that's just outside of our own planet. Kubrick's masterpiece.

2001 takes us to this journey in 4 parts: our origin (Dawn of Man), our future, our struggle with machines that we create, and the cryptic journey into the unknown, between life, death and re-birth. What 2001 tells is mankind in the sight of the universe. Now, without artistic vision, let's see what is great about 2001.

First, the narrative is unlike any other in a movie, and works incredible. Actually, the movie has minimal use of dialogue, replaced instead by music, which helps the movie's meaning and plot. But we also need great special effects, thing which 2001 does incredibly great and believable: the amount of Special Effects in quality terms is simply superb. Even better than Superman, that came out ten years later and is also known for the use of groundbreaking special effects. Performances are also top-notch, and it features one of the most fearful artificial life forms: HAL, the computer system that is present in the Jupiter Mission. It's just...terrifying, to think that the machine spreads fear, cause it has no feelings and for the good of the mission, is capable of anything...yes, even kill. And the worst part is: mankind created it. Huh. But again, that's part of our history in the universe: we create things to build, but also to destroy. Our biggest discovery, can be our greatest danger. Do i even have to talk about the final sequence? The journey into the infinite? It's just breathtaking and suspenful. One of the best sequences ever crafted.

2001 is easily one of my favorite films and one of the best ever done. This is a perfect example of Kubrick's mind, able to craft incredible masterpieces.I might take some time for others to understand it, but by me, i don't care what it means; i know it's an artistic masterpiece. One of the greatest cinematic events in the history of mankind. Nuff said.

HAL scares me...i need dry pants.

HAPPY HOLIDAYS REVIEWS PART 09: 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)

Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon

The director of Hulk made this? Before Hulk? Huh. Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon is one of the best international films i have ever seen (along with Ong Bak), featuring a crisp story, awesome action sequences, beautiful scenery and just the enough taste of entertainment to keep you on track...except the last 15 minutes, which, I'm not gonna lie, i was bored. But the rest still makes the movie worth. Those martial arts battles here are awesome, guess we have to thank Yuen Woo Ping from The Matrix for such incredible scenes. Man, i love martial arts films.

The cast is great, featuring strong actors like Chow Yun-Fat, alongside Michelle Yeoh, Zhang Ziyi and Chen Chang. They all have great characters to perform, and each of the performers charisma gives the movie a boost, helping the story to develop. Everything was going right, but my main problem came twice in the movie (i know what you're thinking, you pervert!), the first is the backstory of Jen. It is good to give your main character a back-story, but it doesn't have to take a lot of screen time at once. If the story would have been told more periodically, it would have been OK. The other problem were the last 15 minutes...I'm sorry, i know they're the end of the story, but man, i was bored. I guess it's because it came after an amazing martial arts fight that was fast-paced, from there going to a slower story-resolution...yep, it was boring. But still it was a correct way to end the story, just not the best moment to do so. It's merely technical, so i shouldn't complain that much.

Nevertheless, Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon (man, it takes a while to write that down) is one of Ang Lee's best films, if not the best (i haven't seen Life of Pi at this far) and surely i would return again and again just to enjoy it again and again. A great martial-arts film, with a taste for good drama.

It's very obvious that they're hanging on wires, come on guys...

HAPPY HOLIDAYS REVIEWS PART 08: Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon (2001)

Shaun of the Dead
½

Shaun of the Dead is one of those zombie movies i wanted to see: not everything has to be people surviving. Shaun also has comedy, gags, correct pace, an everything but dumb dialogue, fresh flavour and it's simply entertaining. This "other" look into the zombie genre is such a new concept that it simply drags attention, and satisfies. The comdey isn't extremely hilarious, but just the perfect level of comedy to fuse with gore, something i only saw working on Zombieland, another cool and well made horror-comedy.

Another thing that made this movie shine it's the cast: they deliver believable characters, each with their own satire and gravitas, and ultimately help the story, not the concept. The latter happens when in a horror movie, characters are so bland, they're obviously made only to be killed. Shaun of the Dead actually makes each character to develop and be useful to the story, even when some of them die, they help on other character's evolution, creating crisp characters. The gags and jokes are actually very funny, and again, they feel like part of the story, and not a desperate manouver to keep audiences up. Here, zombies come with comedy, or no zombie at all. Awesome formula. And last but not least, the story itself has new ways to start, continue and end a zombie apocalypse with convincing results each. Director Edgar Wright couldn't have directed this movie any better.

Shaun of the Dead it's the first of three Edgar Wright comedies, known as the Three Flavour Cornetto Trilogy (now i want ice cream for some reason...), and i'm sure the others will deliver as well. As far as this trilogy goes in this Holiday Reviews, the first one starts strong, and i'm sure i'll continue and end just as strong. A reliable, funny and fresh british horror comedy.

Queen!

HAPPY HOLIDAYS REVIEWS PART 07: Shaun of the Dead (2004)

Gone With the Wind

Gone With The Wind, the timeless epic and Hollywood's most important film. Period.
This grand epic has a unique cinematography, scale and hype that not even Lord of the Rings can top. This story is a hell of an emotional, decent and wit ride; once you see it, you know why is pure movie perfectionism. Gone With The Wind might be the strongest film many will see.

The overall cinematography is perfect, the story-telling is crisp and probably flawless, the score is epic, the performances are pure orgasms of greatness and the characters leave a lasting impression...for the better or for worse. If there's something i hated about this masterpiece, is Scarlett O' Hara. She's my MOST HATED character of all time! Jar Jar Binks is God in comparison (yes, i said that). I mean, she is just the biggest Bitch i've ever seen. Damn. But still, that's part of the story. Here i also met one my favorite characters of all time: Rhett Butler, played by the master legend Clark Gable (no, not the host of Cheaters, you fucktard), this character is just too cool, trolls all the way, and even after he also goes through many miseries, he's still this smart, cool and trolling character, everytime he's on screen, it's like the movie only gets better. Hands down one of the greatest characters ever.

Even if my most hated character is the center of the story here, Gone With the Wind is so great, epic and awesome that nearly 4 hours of Bitch Scarlett can't take any magnificent scent out of it. Hollywood's best example of greatness.

I could say a bottom line here like always, but frankly dear, i don't give a damn.

HAPPY HOLIDAYS REVIEWS PART 06: Gone With The Wind (1939)

The Ten Commandments

Hands down one of the greatest films ever crafted. The Ten Commandments is a perfect example of full effort into a film: tons of extras, giant scope, epic size, incredible score, intelligent, wonderful, loyal to its source material (including then modern investigations) and having only incredible performances, the epicness of this biblical story-based film is obvious even as it starts.

The Ten Commandments tells most of the story of Moses and the mission that God commited to him. Its long runtime is a great excuse to tell the story in a big hollywood scope like this. The movie manages to give story credit to most of the characters without having them dissapearing for long periods of time (The Hobbit anyone?) as well as telling the story as written in the Bible. The movie has an imponent force that keeps going all the way through the nearly 4 hour runtime without losing its majesty at any moment, masterfully telling this epic story that i have faith it happened. It manages to make the characters what they're supposed to be: Moses is this wise, faithful and amazing man, Rameses (played by the great Yul Brynner, or as i like to call him, Mister Magnificent Seven) is this greedy, ambitious and evil pharaoh that ends up as a miserable being with nothing else to lose. All characters and biblical events perfectly represented in Cecil B. DeMille's epic masterpiece.

The Ten Commandments does everything right, and surely is an easely recognizable classic of epic proportions, which special effects and size are impressive even today. A master film and a huge event in movie history.

Seriously, the only way to make Rameses more obviously evil is to write "I'm evil" on his head.

HAPPY HOLIDAYS REVIEWS PART 05: The Ten Commandments (1956)

Carrie
Carrie(1976)
½

Carrie is a look in movie form of bullying, teenage difficulties, crazy fanatism on religion and telekinetic powers as they would be in real life. But Brian DePalma's Carrie is also a movie full of details i despise in all movies in general. Terrifying at most, it is not. Entertaining, it is.

Carrie has strong performances, good special effects and techniques, fitting music and a focused narrative. However, i hate when characters live in "Asshole Town". Asshole Town is what i call when everybody in a movie has to be an asshole, a jerk, an abusive motherfucker. Carrie is full of people from Asshole Town. That's one annoying thing i hate in movies. Sure this movie is about bullying, but does EVERYBODY in the world had to be a complete evil jerk? Plus, personally i think some character development other than Carrie and his mom would have been welcomed, even if the movie needed to extend to two hours long. However, Carrie and Carrie's mom performances were superb. I said the movie wasn't all that terrifying, cause the only terror i have was when Carrie's sick-crazy mom was on screen! Also when looking at Carrie's eyes in the bizarre prom scene. That worth more than a million dollars on thrills.

When it comes to...the overcome, Carrie is a solid, satisfying horror movie, a true classic on the genre and a movie you don't feel sorry to have watched. A sick, bizarre but not horrible adaptation of King's first novel.

Was that an unfinished music video when the girls were training?

HAPPY HOLIDAYS REVIEWS PART 04: Carrie (1976)

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug
½

After "An Unexpected Journey" represented a huge slow-pace problem (which heavily affected the film's outcome), The Desolation of Smaug represents a huge improvement, by delivering more vapid and constant story development, knowing when to time a part of the story and continue with another...for the most. Peter Jackson learned from the criticism over the first film and succeeds in improving it from it's pacing to it's constructive story-telling. More fun, more epic, more constant, more explored, but not more expanded, The Desolation of Smaug gets everything right...or the most of it.

When it comes on following the book, this movie takes its liberties, taking the book as a mere basis. They change a lot of things, sometimes even replacing them with what i like to call "filler". I'm not talking about expanded scenes like in the first one, i'm talking about the new plotlines, characters and stories, along with some new events. We have Legolas, a new character called Tauriel, and many other things not present in the book. Many stories get development, taking over the main story of the Dwarfs and the Hobbit. and it's like very character manages one story at the time: Legolas and Tauriel, then Azog, then Bard, then Gandalf, even some of the dwarfs that doesn't get to fight Smaug. That's the big problem here: it manages way too many plots. Maybe there are 6 or more plots trying to develop themselves AT THE SAME TIME! This causes many stories or characters to not appear until roughly 30 minutes after their last appearance. But, they are very likeable stories full of action and some majesty around, and of course, big special effects. Why the movie tries to develop too many plots? Well, it's forgivable, because it's all leading to the Battle of the Five Armies, event that the next movie will take. Stories like Gandalf, Azog, Legolas, Tauriel and so forth all lead to this to-be epic battle, the climax of The Hobbit.

Now the great stuff: EVERYTHING ELSE! The action is great, it's present in every single plot, so entertaiment is at hand, and the choreography is cool. Legolas gets to be as perfect and implausible as ever, and the dwarfs even get to fight Smaug! Speaking of which, Smaug in this movie is just awesome: the voice, the design, the actions he does, his struggle with the dwarfs...all done great. The movie still has the problem of being too long, but the exciting, action packed climax makes all the bad things worth. It ends on an espectacular cliff-hanger that leaves you with great expectations. After a problematic first movie, the second comes strong and more confident. The many plots may trouble some people, but a true fan will love this and know that the story problems will lead to the next film.

For fans of the book, i warn you, there's a lot of things the movie changes, and with it comes the new characters and stories. Just have in mind it will all lead to the next movie to be more plausible, casue when the Battle of the Five Armies happened in the book, it was very sporadic. Here, it's all to make it more believable. Overall, The Desolation of Smaug is great and a great way to end the year.

Seriously, those Elves have fighting skills so incredible, they could end the war in 5 minutes!

HAPPY HOLIDAYS REVIEWS PART 03: The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013)

Predator
Predator(1987)
½

Oh my God, why does the Predator take like a month to do anything? I got to be honest here: i didn't like this movie. Most of it was great, but later it succumbed into a slow-pacing and boring climax. This movie is nothing like Ridley Scott's Alien, like many said. Let's crumble into my opinion to let clear why i did not gravitate towards this movie:

The performances are good, Schwarzenegger is always a lot of fun, and here we also have Carl Weathers and other entertaining actors which characters were obviously there to be killed. Special effects are also very top-notch, considering that Superman IV was released the same year with a similar 15$ million budget. That's acknowledge in how to spend your movie's money properly. The first two acts of the movie were very solid, it had a great build-up and some tension in between. My problem is in the final act. It's just too slow for my taste, i was impressed, if not annoyed, on how much anything took way too much to happend. Plus, i don't know if it was my screen or the movie itself, but everything was waaaayyy too dark, i barely distinguished anything. I was expecting a classic Arnold vs anything like many of his action movies, but here i got a blind alien punching Arnold...i was really bored. I'm sorry, but i always like a strong final act in movies, it's when all climatic things should happen. Here, i only got slow, toned-down violence at the end. Predator means nothing special to me.

Maybe i expected too much here, more than what this movie made about 25 years ago could give me. I guess i should have no expectations for classics in order to actually be surprised by them. I'm sorry to say this, but Predator is overrated. That doesn't mean it's bad, it's just praised on the wrong elements. If it is for the impressive special effects, i can understand, those were awesome here. But in everything else? No, i'm sorry, but no. I'm going to recieve too much hate for this, but that's not my objetive here, i just have to be honest: I don't like Predator. I guess i'll just keep loving Alien and Aliens instead.

Does mud really work as a camuflage to thermal vision googles?

HAPPY HOLIDAYS REVIEWS PART 02: Predator (1987)

Evil Dead
Evil Dead(2013)
½

This remake of the low-budget 1981 original by Sam Raimi is actually a pretty solid one (i would say "decent" but with so many gore, it wouldn't be right). This remake has enough atmosphere, build-up, exceptional gore and references to work the enough, even if it simply can't top any of the other films. Maybe because the three Sam Raimi Evil Dead films were more about slapstick and horror, while this one is more about terror. Even without humor, this one gives the saga a solid ground to hold up to new generations.

The story is very similar to the 1981's original, except that thanks to a Hollywood budget, the story covers a bit more about the actual entity that haunts the characters. Speaking of which, most of the characters went undeveloped, of course it's bad, but i really never care about characters in horror films anymore, they're just there to suffer and deliver emphasis to the story with their deaths. Evil Dead also has top-notch special effects, one of the two spots where the remake succeded better than the original. The other would be the devil entity itself. I liked that they actually showed it here and took over the climax as its scene. In the original is more subtle, but i really wanted to see this entity. Guess the low budget is to blame there. Back to the remake, it manages to be good by its own, but the original and specially its semi-sequel (Evil Dead II) grounds this easly.

"Best Remakes" does't necessarily mean movies that were better than the original, but just good by their own, case in point, i think this new Evil Dead enters on a Best Remakes list, or if still not, then just as a solid terror movie. A likeable remake.

Groovy.

HAPPY HOLIDAYS REVIEWS PART 01: Evil Dead (2013)

My Bloody Valentine 3-D

It's thrilling and fearfull, but the bland extecution of My Bloody Valentine and it's awful unsatisfying ending brings it down terribly.

The Cell
The Cell(2000)

A bit too over-builded and a bit too heavy to take, but The Cell has impressing visuals; questionable wheter is art or not? Screw that, it's eye-popping and beautiful. It's as much ambigous as The End of Evangelion, so you must have a bit of perception more than human-psycho understanding to enjoy The Cell.

Paparazzi
Paparazzi(2004)

Provoking, but boring, boring, boring, boring and questionable in everything. Ouch.

DOA: Dead or Alive

Ridiculous acting, bad over-the-top dialogue, stupid-minimal character development, awful plot, abysmal-fast pace and lack of self-care, this film is some of the worst i have seen in videogame adaptations. The worst detail? Ryu Hayabusa, here they fucked-up a great videogame character to a bland, nothing complex ninja. That's bad guys, i'm pissed off.

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

A truly heartful and sometimes epic movie that takes a very interesting premise enlighted by powerful performances and consistent progression, avoiding boredom...at times.

Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones

Well, it's another OK movie, a bit better than Pahntom...in a technical way. I found this Anakin very unlikeable and the movie feels overlong at times. The climax is epic, but the outcome is mixed.

Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi

This film is more like a depleted continuation, but still pretty epic and awesome. The Star Wars finale is very satisfying and classic, something not all trilogies do.

The Fast and the Furious
½

The first Fast & Furious movie is surely a bit whimsical to remember, but let's forget the optimist side of this. Just...Cars, that's it, and pretty people on them. Not much to recall but it marks the beggining of a surprisingly lenghty saga, that thank god, it's hitting good roads now days.

Fast & Furious 6
½

Fast & Furious 6 is another great example of sequel: follow what made the last one a hit and update it as much as possible. This movie don't exercise the brain cells, but who cares? This is pure summer fun: Cars, punches, thrills, break of laws of physics, and of course, Dwayne Johnson. The saga was first very unnessesary, but now is hitting great roads, which judging by the scene during the credits, i hope the next one follows the same road as 5 and 6. Next time, the Fast and Furious team vs The Transporter himself, Jason Statham. Probably, this movie is tied with Fast Five as the best of the franchise, if not the best.

The Incredibles

I'm sorry. But i have to be honest here, for me, The Incredibles are just the Credibles. First of all, i'm going to say by the start i was expecting something different from this movie, judging by the trailers and hype by many other people. I was expecting something greater. In what way? For me, it would have been better if the whole film was about the family already as the Incredibles instead of the origin story. Plus, is not the Incredibles until the third act...then why is the family name the whole title again? Plus, the villain; it's very praised by critics, but me personally is not so different from other super-hero villains...i would say generic, but even i think that gets way too far from what i really think. I think it's my fault for expecting way too much comedy from a film that actually wanted something serious. For what it is, it still has that cool creativity that Pixar always has and it's huge family entertaining. I didn't love it, but surely i'm glad i saw it. If you love it, then go ahead and love it, leave me with my misery.

So THIS is where Iron Man 3 got the origin of the villain!

The Wizard of Oz
½

While a bit unbalanced when it comes into the third act, the rest of The Wizard of Oz runs flawlessly, with its especially cathcy soundtrack, groundbreaking special effects, great and charming performances, crisp story that's character-driven and a sense of wonder all around. Oz inspired a lot of magical colorful worlds in fantasy movies and even today it's a huge classic. The Wizard of Oz is one of those movies that gets everything right, and it just feels wondeful. Plus, this movie masterfully puts multi character developlment in a way i haven't see anywere else. The Wizard of Oz is a timeless musical trip.

That Glinda Witch is really a bitch, i mean "I didn't tell you before about the red shoe because you wouldn't believe me". Damn, what a cop-out.

Transporter 3
½

While a bit...warm, this movie is overall dull and as much alive as a doll. The movie suffers from lack of energy or innovation. It's not surprise to find this movie in a very low price even at Blockbuster, that says a lot of its non-existent worth.

No lap dance from that redhead chick? Sin. Sins everywhere.

Transporter 2

Much of this sequel is more action and a bit of character development, something surprising for this kind of movies. Well done, not great or entirely satisfying, but well done. The second movie improves over the first one by offering more original and more over-the-top action and a scale a bit bigger. And of course, more interesting characters. It's nothing great, but it's a huge relief. Hollywood needs more sequels like this one to average action movies.

Have you noticed how ridiculous Jason Statham looks on the cover of this movie? That pose is like ready for cirmucision.

The Transporter
½

The Transporter is your average action movie with uncaring story, bland characters, quick dialogue scenes, not so special fights, ridiculous stunts and overall sense of detachment. It's entertaining yes, but this movie is just one of millions of action movies with videogame short story and everything else is punches and explosions, even guns. It doesn't have any reason to be made. but as it is here, at the least we should give it a try on a weekend...you know, when you really have nothing better to do.

Hey, just because Jason Statham looks thinner during extreme scenes doesn't necessarily mean it's a stunt double!...yeah!

Superman II
Superman II(1981)

One of the greatest sequels ever made, Superman II could be as much perfect as the first if it wasn't for the humor occasionally getting in where it shouldn't. But otherwise, a nearly-perfect movie in a saga that has not come back to glory...until Man of Steel, that is.

Superman
Superman(1978)

This film is not about actors, or tributes, it's a film with the real Superman, with the real Lois Lane and the real Lex Luthor. ¿What? ¿They're actors? Wow, they act and look so good that i believed i was actually watching the characters from the comic coming to life. This is the greatest Superman film, and i'm sure that no matter how many Superman films will be made untill everything ends, this one will never be surpassed cause this has the best element of all: Christopher Reeve as Superman. No one can match that.

Instead of telling the origin of a super-hero, the movie actually takes Superman as a person, a character that's the star of the movie, and thus, we see his life. The movie acts like the first part of Kal-El's biopic: we see his most important moments in life and the people around him. And it's all well made, strongly written, well acted and overall awesomely put together, all along with John Williams incredibly epic score. No one better than him to musicalize a masterpiece like this one.

Superman is still today one of the definitive comic-book movies, why? Cause it was the first time a super hero was adapted by its mythology, not his powers. Old Superman serials and comics had him doing Super things, but it never felt like a human; he barely had any existential issues and there was nothing Supes couldn't do, he wasn't a human, he was A FREAKING GOD. No human at all. This movie knew that, and it took this super hero as a person destined for greatness, but still to have some coplexity on him, like any human being. Also, he is not perfect: Superman fails a couple of times in the movie, he makes mistakes much like any other human, he questions things, like any human being, he sometimes even lets himself to be managed by emotions, again, like any human. This movie is the first to take a super hero seriously, and it changed comic book movie forever, even after Batman Begins re-changed it again in 2005. But surely that wouldn't have been the same if this movie didn't existed. Superman, one of my favorite movies of all time that it's just timeless. I believed a man can fly.

...Superman goes back in time by flying around the world faster than a speeding bullet? (But not faster than two nuclear rockets it seems.)

Superman III
Superman III(1983)
½

This third Superman film takes the Man of Steel at his best and tore him down thanks to an unfunny thematic, lack of charm, overuse of Pryor as Gus and little Superman by Reeve. This movie could say :"Starring Richard Pryor and ALMOST starring Christopher Reeve as Superman". Supes comes in third plane here, while it should be the star of the movie. The only good thing from this one is that battle with Evil Superman vs Clark Kent, and Christopher Reeve still is perfect as now three characters: Clark, Superman and Evil Superman, even giving the little screen time it has here. One of the worst third parts ever. Even the Hangover III doesn't sucks this much.

Superman II
Superman II(2006)
½

If only this film was finished...what it could have been...but as far as what we can get here, this film could definitely be superior to the 1978 original, but it's hard to tell when its not complete. Some details about Donner's Cut are very surpising and the outcome is awesome. I reccomend it to every Superman fan.

Flash Gordon
Flash Gordon(1980)

Flash Gordon is the 80's all its glory: campy, colorfull, questionable plastic costumes, weird style, silly plots, over-the-top as it can get, obvious green and blue screen effects, crappy space effects, corny dialogue, it's like a better version of Batman and Robin without all the indifference; Flash Gordon is one fun trip to the 80's cornyness!

The characters have no personality, the story is silly, the effects are crappy even by the 80's standard, the dialogue is too cheesy, it's trashy, it's a mess, but Flash Gordon was made to be so, and because it accomplished it, it's practically a success. Even if the mission was to be campy and fun, i still have my own limits on how corny a movie can be, and Flash Gordon goes a bit too far from that limit. My biggest problem here was the porn-parody fashion when depicting women most of the time. It's reliable to have fan service for all genres, but there's also a limit on that, and again, this movies goes a bit too far, and we never even get to see anyone naked, but almost, because of those questionable costumes. But that is only a minor bother. And also, it has its soundtrack made by Queen! That's awesome.

Flash Gordon is the 80's in one movie, all that makes it fun to watch. If you're for a nostalgic trip to where movies not always needed to be serious to be fun, this is the correct movie to choose. This could've been a guilty pleasure, but there's no guilt when the movie wants to be fun by being dumb in porpuse. Flash Gordon is all corny and no boring.

Apparently there's a porn version called "Flesh Gordon", but with all the sex innuendos and revealing clothes here, i can't even imagine how this itself is not the porn version...

The Matrix Reloaded
½

Maybe a bit too much loaded, but the second Matrix is to be admirable: the scale and scope of this movie is huge, we get to see more of the Matrix, more of the world of Zion, it expands its horizons. Also, the action scenes are amazing! This movie also has one of my favorite action scenes of all time: that Chateau fight followed by that awesomely breathtaking highway scene...damn, was that incredible. Reloaded it's a movie that actually has fun with itself at the same time you're having fun. A movie that's able to make that is doing something right...overall most of the movie is OK, it is the conclusion that makes this sequel a troublesome one: the "explination" of the Matrix is very confusing and makes it way too much complicated, more than it needs to be. So, taking out those last 20 minutes, the rest is a solid continuation of an awesome movie, with way too many good elements to make it work. A less satisfying sequel, but still memorable and fun.

...so the Matrix is what?

Wes Craven's New Nightmare
½

Definitely the second best Nightmare movie after the first movie. New Nightmare has, much like the first movie, the creativity of the series creator: Wes Craven. His mind here has a lot of ideas for story, visuals and finally a great execution after many lackluster sequels. This "meta-film" bring new interest into the saga (even if it went nowhere after this one) and feels as much new as if there was no Nightmare on Elm Street before this one. After many shameful returns, Freddy finally gets justice to his reputation.

Many elements that went unused or used with little potential in the sequels to the first movie, are very exploited in this one, such as the build-up (it's kind of long...), the tension, the imaginative visuals, the great special effects, the frightening Krueger, you get the idea. The story itself is inventive too: the events of the movie are pretty much not happening at the same time they do. It's like a movie telling how a movie is being done, and at the same time it's not. It's complicated, but not so much to feel confused. Talking about Freddy, he looks better than ever, i liked his look here, very devil-ish, those eyes, that attitude...he's great, not even in the first movie he looked so terrifying.

New Nightmare is the sequel (or "other" movie) i always expected from Nightmare on Elm Street; even if the third was good enough, this one did more than that, it make me look at the saga the way many said it were, but i never found until this: a classic horror series. Not the best movie, but one of the most reccomended to watch.

This movie only grabbed a few elements from Hansel & Gretel, that pretty much makes this movie a better adaptation of that novel than Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters...that's pathetic.

A Nightmare on Elm Street

The hype for this movie was my main problem with A Nightmare On Elm Street. Let's put it this way: there are movies that you think are not that bad (in my case, movies like Hancock, Hook, etc.), and there could be also some movies that you think are not that great...that's my opinion here on this "classic terrifying" movie: i don't think is that great.

It has great performances, amazing special effects that easly beats today's CG crap and a very creative premise that exploits its potential...yet the result is not scary or terrifying. I barely felt haunted or creepied, and there was little to no tension building up to anything. Also, the beginning is very sporadic, so is the ending; it's like it feels forced or rushed and not quite the best to introduce you or get you out of this movie's "mood". Also, many find Freddy scary, but i think he's like a pre-Tim Curry as IT: it doesn't scare, it causes big laughs at their attitudes. I mean, God, Freddy's a riot: he's more hilarious than threatening.
But the execution of the overall idea is greatly done and directed, so ultimately i can understand why this is considered a classic even if i didn't gravitate towards it. I'm glad i saw this...i just don't think it's great.

UPDATE: After watching ALL of the Nightmare on Elm Street movies (including New Nightmare and Freddy vs Jason), i can now understand why this is a great movie: it's the best of the series. I still have problems with this movie, but now is my favorite from the series, so calm your skepticism.

Neon Genesis Evangelion - Movie: The End of Evangelion

It's not for everyone, that's for sure. The movie is more than a masterpiece, it's a piece of art. Goes as much deeper in the human existence subject as well as offering a more climatic, convincing ending to one of the best animes ever made.

While the ending of the series managed to close circles with character Shinji, the rest was left out. How did the Instrumentality happen? What could happen next? What the fuck was happening? All answers are here, in The End of Evangelion. The story centers around an overly depressed Shinji, and how his desires, hatred, and all kinds of emotions ultimately has consequences in what could be the World's End (and with it, our possible rebirth) or the future of humanity. The movie has great animation, amazing visuals, great shots and all kinds of cryptic and symbolical sequences that not every person will understand. That's the issue with many people in this movie, they don't get anything of what's going on. Well, of course you have to watch the entire series to understand and have an eye and mind for symbolism and religion.

This movie has many things that make it work: the ambientation gives the feeling that the end is near, and somehow, we are there. And also, we know is coming, it could happen any time, by any cirmustance. The movie has a very climatic, emotional and character circles coming to close scene, were we see all humans dying and transforming into one sole being. The movie is fantastic. The music and songs just fits so perfectly, and the sequences and dialogue are so intriguing that it's impossible to forget this movie. This is a perfect ending for a great anime like Neon Genesis Evangelion; it closes everything and also leaves a huge space for interpretation, such like the final scene:

Shinji is alone in a red beach, full of LCL (the human being without soul or form) with Asuka, the girl he constantly pleeded for. Shinji sees a ghostly Rei (like in the first episode of the series) that suddenly dissapears. The he sees Asuka, wounded but apparently fine. And then...he strangles her. This in order to prove "a human emotion", to prove that both are separated from the united existence of the humans (turned into LCL); by Asuka rejecting Shinji, like she always do. However, instead, she caresses his face. The last line is by her words: "How disgusting". And the story of Evangelion ends.

Wow, now that's and ending only a true fan could understand and be OK with. A nearly-perfect ending that satysfies. Ultimately the point of this ending is not let the ending as it was written, instead give a solid basis for the fans to create their own conclusions: there's no concrete ending for this story, it depends on the fan, he or she can interpretate it the way they want; if it's a happy ending, a sad one, a mystical one, or every kind of finale you can think, it depends on you. I thought that was very ingenious, that way everyone can have the ending they want. It's confusing, but not for me, i know every scene, every line, leads to the perfect finale of a perfect series. Probably the deepest movie i have watched.

What the Fuck did Gendo say before killing Ritsuko? Did the audio cut out?

The Forbidden Kingdom

It's over-the-top, cheesy at times, doesn't take itself too seriously, has a one-note villain and the story isn't any original. However, it also has tons of elements that makes it fun: Jackie Chan and Jet Li finally fight one-on-one, there's a lot of kung-fu fashion and the scenarios are those whimsical chinese environments that are always cool. The Forbidden Kingdom knows how to have a simple story and stretch a lot of it with kung-fu fun that reminds the old glory days of those movies, when Bruce Lee was a martial arts god (and alive...pretty much). The main character and the villain are meeh, but the other characters are very strong and curious (that white-silver haired girl...she's weird, but surely looks cool) and the special effects are very good too. The movie falls into classic save this kind of story, but here is forgiveable, as there's a lot to keep you in this martial arts world.

The Forbidden Kingdom is to become a classic probably by 2028 for sure, but instead of waiting that much, simpy watch it and take it for what it is: a kung fu movie with kung fu battles, chinese mythology and Jackie fighting Jet Li. A fun, but not perfect movie.


I'm really getting tired of the "it was a dream but it wasn't" kind of ending.

Judge Dredd
Judge Dredd(1995)
½

Judge Dredd has to be one of the most silly comic book movies ever, it just takes every single cliche possible and has very a over-the-top flavour-fashion spread all over the movie. Those costumes look like the quality of a parody and the story is very predictible and generic. All this represents huge silly fun while watching Judge Dredd.

The actors, while good on their jobs, simply deliver a very over-blown and cheesy characterization, were everybody has to say one-liners, bad jokes, scream every line they say and be as exaggerated as possible...the must funny of all them has to be Amand Asante as Rico, he is one over-the-top dude and just can't be taken seriously. In other movies that's a problem, but here forms part of the fun. If there's one actor that seems unnecessary, is Rob Schneider...yeah, he's as unfunny and annoying as always, but at least he's just half Jar-Jar Binks here (unlike many of Rob's movies). I could say the good details about this movie, like the musical score by Alan Silvestri, some of the visuals and so forth, but it doesn't make sense, as the bad details also seem to make the movie more watchable. Judge Dredd surely is one train-wreck.

At the end, Judge Dredd can't be the best comic book movie, can't be the most decent film ever and not even the worst comic movie ever, it just can be everyone's guilty pleasure of the week. Give it a shot during a weekend, it's an hour and a half of pure dumb fun.

You can't expect much in a movie where a british comic book hero is played by an Italian actor made by an American company.

The Hunger Games: Catching Fire

After a surprisingly faithful adaptation of the first book, Catching Fire does a well job in adapting the book (my favorite from the three) to the big screen. Many of the scenarios and actions writted on the book makes its way to the shots of the movie, all enchanced by the actors' performances. Jennifer delivers another great performance as Katniss Everdeen and the new actors also play well their respective roles, as well as being faithful.

This second movie correctly adapts much of the book: the plot, the dialogue, the events, and delivers the same feelings of haunting, fear, suspense and psychological character development as they were presented on the book. I was really glad that they stayed true to the book, i liked how they cut and resized some scenes to make them shorter but still to work as well as in the book, and also how they adapted the 75th Hunger Games, i mean, the clock arena, the electromagnetic field, the dangers of each hour in the arena, etc; all well putted on the screen. For both faithful fans and general audiences, this second movie will do well in continuing the story and deliver many unforgettable moments. Yet, my problem was that it is wayyy to much similar to the book. It's good, but we also need a few surprises for those that already know what will happen (for example, Stanley Kubrick's The Shining did a good work in this field), so we can say that fans of the book will find no surprises here. But that lack of surprises is replaced with the joy of watching what we read, so it's still very good for all audiences.

Sadly enough, with this movie, Hollywood already adapted the best story of the trilogy, so we can't expect that the following movies will top this one at all...but who knows, maybe they can work that out. Just saying, this is the best part of the story, so if you're gonna watch a Hunger Games movie, better be this one, cause it takes the story to it's most climatic. A decent and very well done adaptation of the book, and for those that only follow the movies, this one is a superior film to the first: it's more enjoyable, more suspenful, more developed, more intense, bigger, better and boasting.

If only that damn camera wasn't moving so much during the action scenes...

A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors

After a really terrible sequel, Nightmare On Elm Street goes back on track with the third movie and second sequel: Dream Warriors. This movie now apllies action and less suspense, but fairly a lot more visual style, which lacked big time in the second film. The performances were nice, the story and explained origin of Freddy Krueger were pretty descent and this feels like a complementary sequel instead of an unnessessary one, which normally slasher horror sequels never do. However, this third movie has problems with it's climax, it never lives up to it's potential and feels incompetent, and after that, it has that very sporadic fast-paced epilogue that nobody likes, and that the previous Elm movies also had. It ultimately feels rushed and doesn't quite adds to nothing after finishing the movie; more easy to say: it doesn't last long in your memory.

All the same, Dream Warriors is a huge improvement over the terrible Freddy's Revenge. It's like the makers did learn from their mistakes and put a lot of what we originally wanted in the second movie. I liked a lot the visual effects and there's a lot of fun when Robert Englund is on screen as Krueger. All leaves to a more fun, more entertaining, more fast paced sequel to the original movie. Take it for what it is, a sometimes ridiculous but overall fun movie to spend time.

Alien Resurrection

This last Alien film has not much to talk about, it's bad , dumb and really below average, the new Ripley is not charming, a bit, but not completely. And the plot is very episodic, the character development is minimal and there's not much action. It reaches an interesting yet lackluster climax that makes sure an Alien 5 to never happen.

Friday the 13th, Part VI - Jason Lives
½

This is not my favorite Friday the 13th film, but surely is the best sequel to the original (even if i didn't like the first one that much). Jason Lives decides to forget about subtly, starts to act fast (but not smarter), kills faster, grabs something and kills with his new supernatural strenght and speed, sometimes leading to hilarious death scenes. And totally voluntary that way. All these details makes Jason Lives a fun movie even if its 3rd acts falls into the same slow and abysmally pacing from the other movies. It's no guilty pleasure even, but in a saga were everything has been dissapointing, Jason Lives decided to just have fun with itself, and it almost works this time.

Bottomline, Jason Lives still makes the saga pretty sucky, but it's a huge improvement over the sequels, with its no-taking seriously tone, meta-humor and more constant Jason, Jason Lives does bring a bit of life to the saga, but no everlasting memories to our minds. Sadly movie, you ALMOST got it right this time...almost...

Turns out if your dead rotten corpse is hit with a lightning while on your coffin, you get SUPER STRENGHT! I'm gonna try that now. Let me get my gun...

Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare
½

This movie is a riot. It's the clumsiest way to end a large series. It's the most generic way to end a series. It's the most dull way to put an end to a series. Freddy's Dead surely was titled that way because a movie as clumsy as this can easly kill a series. Let's see what's wrong with The Final Nightmare.

We have our bland cast, that knows everything but acting. We also have our weirdness that is all over this movie. Some of the effects are good, but not impressive, and even the visual style seems to get old. After 7 years, the saga completely ran out of ideas. You know what's Jumping the Shark in a movie? Is when, creatively speaking, it's all over. Freddy's Dead jumped the shark. The ending should've been climatic, but it's clumsy and fast, and not likeable, also generic and rushed. Freddy has survived a lot of things, but it seems it can't survive itself at this point. The Final Nightmare is that impotent, incompetent and dissapointing conclusion that often happens a lot. You may rest in shame Freddy...even if you still came back 2 other times later.

So, having 3D glasses in your dreams makes a master of you? Like i said, this series jumped the shark.

Friday the 13th, Part V - A New Beginning
½

A New Beginning has the brilliant idea of changing the killer in order to continue this clumsy saga...well, is not very different to begin with. It's the same: killer kills, is stopped, cliff-hanger indicating it ain't over, the end, it's getting really old. The movie is just way too similar to the other movies and feels more unecessary than ever. A New Beginning is one of those big failed ideas that all it can deliver is only the wrong material, with the wrong characters and the wrong kind of story. All this movie get is wrong.

Ultimately, a very forgettable entry in an already unsatisfying series which never seems to get better. Oh my god, and there's still more movies to see. I've heard this movie is retconned in the next movie, so you might as well skip this one and pretend it doesn't exist. It's easy when a movie is as forgettable as this one.

Did Tommy killed fake Jason only so he could become the new Jason? This movie is the worst.

A Nightmare on Elm Street 5: The Dream Child
½

This might be one of my newest guilty pleasures, which means it has it's good details and it's enjoyable bad ones. This fifth entry is more of the same: Krueger's back, got to find a way to beat him, people die, weak resolution, cliff-hanger "Freddy's alive" fashion, end. But there's something about Dream Child that makes it more fun than Dream Master. Probably it's the fast pace, probably the humor by part of Freddy, probably the characters being simple but not annoying, probably the still amazing special effects, probably the still imaginative visual style, or maybe all of these elements all together, yeah, probably that. It's the same, but just more fun.

Dream Child can also be one of the series' most underrated movies, not that it deserves to be recognized as "good", but to be recognized as one of the most accessible and entertaining to watch. Not a good movie, just a fun one.

So, Jason was killed by a kid, here Freddy is killed by an UNBORN baby? These killers are awful.

Friday the 13th - The Final Chapter

The Final Chapter my balls. This movie is better than Part III, but still represents a heavily underwhelming experience. Jason takes waaayy too much time to kill something, much of the screen time is given to horny un-interesting teenagers and fan service, the dialogue is full of stupidness, the story is minimal (or none at all) and the new characters are bland and un-original, plus, it's a bit of a bore. To be the "final chapter", this movie isn't the bit least climatic and even the ending is very sporadic. What a piece of gory shit.

But the way Jason kills is very cool and we also have some relief from this movie trying to be more constant on Jason killing something. He even gets to kill a dog here! At this point the series have only proved me that it doesn't have any elements to become a classic or even an admirable series at all unlike Nightmare on Elm Street or even Halloween. We all knew this wasn't going to be the ending, and that's the worst from here: i still have more Friday the 13th movies to watch and it doesn't seem to get better at all. This movie sucks and this series should've ended with the first movie in the first place, but i still have to keep going on with this and finish it. Ok, let's leave this clear, this isn't the worst movie ever, but it doesn't have any reasons to exist. Let's act like it actually doesn't for our sake.

So you're telling me a kid killed Jason? You're shitting my balls people, you're shitting my balls.

A Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master
½

After an apparent defeat, Freddy's back once more to do the same he has done 3 times earlier: kill people. All this because a dog peed fire when on a black guy's dream! If you can go with that, then Dream Master isn't much trouble. The problem with this fourth entry is the lack of originality (that is of course in the general concept) and the movie is less subtle than the others. However, Dream Master isn't the worst of the Nightmare on Elm Street Series (for the least). The sub-title suggest something inventive, but is just a show-off idea that is wighted down by the movie's already over used concept, that mimic of the Dream Master is only useful at the very last 10 minutes, the climax.

Performances are OK, but characters have an already-seen attitude: one is shy but with a heart of gold, another is the girl confort, another one the nerdy with glasses, another one the though woman, etc; it goes were every Elm Street movie has gone before. Same with the story: every kill only leads to a team-up going for our killer at the climax. All is the same material with different look.

However, the more constant appearance of Freddy gives a good relief, his deadly comedic moments works most of the time, the special effects are still inventive and works great too, and the overall movie is entertaining; pretty much because even if it's the same material from the previous movies, it's still kind of interesting how everything is going to be solved. I was glad that the epilogue was a calmed one and not a riot.

Bottomline, Dream Master can't be the best of the Nightmare movies, but surely is one of the most fun to watch. If you liked the first or third movies, then you'll have little to no problem watching Dream Master. An uneven but fun ride.

Seriously, Freddy NEVER saw himself on a mirror before?

The Devil Wears Prada
½

I never thought i could enjoy this. The Devil Wears Prada is a well put-together comedy-drama about a story i thought i couldn't give a shit, but it was the living goddess of acting Meryl Streep along with Anne Hathaway's performance, some comdey and a well exposed moral that it actually took me by surprise, finding it pretty solid. Because of this, there's nothing i can say to let clear that i, just like many others, found this movie surprisingly fun, and feels good to watch. Overall it's a well made film, so yes, it worths your time, big time. But of course, if fashion isn't your thing, then this might seem a little bit out of your reach...but i don't like fashion at all, i just like well made movies.

Edward Scissorhands

This classic is one of those films you can't stop watching. Its just so charming, it's almost impossible to overlook everytime it's on screen. Edward Scissorhands is also unique because it has a "lovely weirdness", something barely seen in movies (usually the weird stuff stays weird). Johnny does a very naive, innocent and enchanting central character, and Winona Ryder also delivers an accurate co-star (i'm not a big fan of her by the way). The movie also teaches some kind of message: how we treat a person by how they look, and how selfish we can be when that person is useful and when is not, and also how awful the people can be when they find out they can have control over someone. All this with some comedy on the way to enjoy. This is just the beginning of the Burton-Depp collaborations that would spawn several other films.

Blade: Trinity
½

Blade decided that a simplier story, with a simplier villain and simplier action scenes than the other movies would certainly work. Blade Trinity is one of those extremely lacking movies, lacks strong action choreography, lacks good character development, lacks an interesting villain (and an interesting actor to potray him) and just keeps getting things wrong. First of all: the Blade character isn't interesting anymore. Second, one of the most working characters is quickly dropped off from the movie: Whistler. Third: the new characters are bland: they lack any kind of likeness and doesn't help that much to the movie. Fourth, the story is boring. Fifth, the action scenes are pretty generic. And sixth, the movie just some sort of ends, without much explination and just a pair of lines.

After Blade managed to open the way for Marvel in movies, Blade II did a great job continuing the story and keep the character on track. Trinity simply decided to be an average movie, with no surprises, nothing reliable, forgettable and just a money-sucker for lasting fans. This movie feels more dry then a vampire-bited-human.

Piranha 3-D
Piranha 3-D(2010)
½

Yep, it is what you expect, so i guess i can't balme this movie for being cheesy, full of horror movie cliches (the dull bullies, the dumb hot girls, the dumb teenagers to be slaughtered, the killer moments, gore, nudity, over the top, useless brain cells, exposition, etc.) with questionable 3d effects, pointless scenes here and there and a cameo appearance by Christopher Lloyd as an over-the-top crazy scientist. All this elements are awful for a movie, specially in a genre like horror-slasher that has exploit them like shit, but here in Piranha it actually makes part of the fun of watching it. You know this got to be dull, sexy, closer to a porn-parody quality, gory and all that to make it work. Yet you feel bad giving it a high rating, which is ironic, to give a low rating because the movie got you what you expected. Overall, a guilty pleasure.

Thor: The Dark World

The first Thor was a fun, comedic and entertaining blockbuster, but also very predictible and linear. This one actually takes some risks, delivers many surprises, offers huge entertaiment and feels both hilariously comedic as well as a serious comic book action movie. Thor The Dark World has improved from the first, and surely will please fans and movie-goers as well.

The film includes huge tons of emotional moments, action, comedy, surprise turns and a lot of what people like in movies, so Thor The Dark World is nothing but all you seek in a movie: entertaiment, ressonant and unforgettable. The plot is very simple, but the twists and surprises makes it more complex, even if there's a bit of convenient exposition over there. How about the action scenes? Incredible, it's almost a non-stop fest with comedy reliefs that manage to not distract from the plot. The musical score by Brian Tyler is epic, and fits the action, emotional, dark and comedic scenes, and the Thor Theme he made to this movie is way better than Patrick Doyle's Thor. And also, the movie takes advantage of Thor and Loki's fragile situation, and delivers a surprising turn and a strong emotional ressonance.

And noooowww the bad things: it seems like a rip-off at times. First, the world of Asgard still looks like a videogame overworld. Second: many scenes feels like coming from a Star Wars movie; laser guns, ships, holograms, etc. Third, it also feels like Lord of the Rings at times, specially at the first action scene in the movie and partially the second. Fourth, the villain is purely a one-dimensional character with linear development, we don't know nothing from him except that he's evil, bum, there's your villain. Not to be too mean, but even the "Mandarin" in Iron Man 3 is more complex.

There's a lot more i could say about this movie, but i don't want to spoil anything, it's better if you find out by yourself. All the same, Thor The Dark World is a movie that's better than expected and offers more than what it shows, and is much less dissapointing than Iron Man 3. Watch it, it is worthy of your time and money...ah yes, there are a couple after-credits scenes, you should stay and watch them too...they leave you to great expectations.

A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge

The second Nightmare is very short on caring about everything. Freddy's Revenge changes the concept but doesn't quite work well: it lacks tension, build-up, good acting, suspense, and the kind of visual style of the first movie. I'm not a big fan of the first movie, i thought it was "OK", but my god, this sequel is one of the weirdest ever.

Freddy now instead of killing people while on their dreams, he actually manipulates the main character to kill. It seems interesting, but sometimes changes aren't enough: you need to know how to exploit it, and do it well. This change of direction however doesn't make the film that different from the first. Actually, much of the little build-up is mostly a rehash of the first movie; it's really lazy when a sequel has to build itself upon already seen events instead of by the own continuation's events. Repetition is never good (unless it's Pizza), it makes the movie very predictible and quickly starts to bore, it can even make a movie feel longer than what it is. This film is only an hour an twenty-five minutes long, but it felt like Lord of the Rings to end.

This movie also has the sin of having sub-par acting. But you can't blame the actors when the characters they have to potrait are boring an un-attaching all the way. You can't feel the character's apparent fear or madness, nor you feel anything when they are killed (probably because you can also already see it coming), and it's also predictible when they're putting new characters, that they introduce them just to be killed. Wow, now that i think about it, the story is lame, and doesn't even feature Freddy Krueger for the most part (and he looks and acts seemingly less threatening, and ironically, it's the same actor), just to make it worse, the overall execution is very weak, so dissapointment is assured here.

Does this movie have any good details? Well, certainly a few: while the visual style lacks imagination, some special effects still look good and there's a few unintentionally funny moments, most of them are supposed to be scary. It keeps you on the road, but this is a movie you only watch one time and can be quickly forgotten. Hell, i barely remember it as i write this part here. I never understanded why the first one is such an acclaimed movie, but after watching how awful can the sequels be, i think i'm probably starting to getting it. Maybe by the 5th movie i will fully understand.

Dragonball Evolution

Dragon Ball is probably the best anime ever made. It was everything: epic, hilarious, fun, emotional, etc. But the producers of Fox doesn't know that, nor they care.

Dragonball Evolution is probably the second worst adaptation ever (just behind The Last Airbender and how it could not: the dialogue is full of cliches, unfunny jokes, repetitive and dumb, all in really bad acting (except for Chow Yun-Fat) clumsy editing during the fight scenes and sceneraios that belong more to a rollercoaster; also full of bad Nintendo 64 special effects rip-off. Let's crumble this movie a little bit to examine all the things wrong with this piece of shit:

The beginning includes a backstory about King Piccolo and how he tried to destroy the earth. At this far, it seems to follow the original Dragon Ball. However, it goes off-track quickly after that: Piccolo has a beast called Ozaru that serves him. Some magicians create a spell that encages Piccolo and stops him. With Piccolo defeated, Ozaru dissapears, and peace comes to earth. However, two thousand years on the present, Piccolo escapes and is on to get the 7 Dragonballs and summon the Dragon Shenlong to make his wish of conquer to come true...well that's the first 3 minutes and it already has a lot of fails:
First, Ozaru is the transformation that every Saiyan goes through when he is to unleash all hos power, also when the moon is at full. If he's Piccolo's minion here, then that means the Saiyan's doesn't exist here. One prime element of the series eliminated from this "adaptation". Second, Piccolo was defeated by Goku in the manga and series, thus creating Piccolo Jr. that would become Goku's rival at first and then one of his most beloved friends. Here, is some damn Magicians. Third, they never explain how Piccolo escapes, and fourth, get use to the legend of the Dragonballs, cause the movie tells it a lot of times through the hour and twenty-minutes, like if we could forget it soon, because sure, we are some fucking idiots.

As you can see, it's only three minutes in and i already hate this. You can guess how the rest of the movie goes. The rest is bad fighting, exposition, bad acting, bad special effects, bad jokes, stupid dialogue, stupid characters, dumb decisions, and other things. Just to quickly explain why this is a really awful adaptation, here's a list:

-Ozaru is a Piccolo minion.
-Goku is 18 and has none of the attitude of the original (he was innocent and naive, but with an unbeatable spirit).
-Goku is a copy of Peter Parker here: he's constantly being bullied for no reason.
-The bullies are the most stereotypical of all time.
-The Nameks are a destructive race.
-An eclipse is nessessary to awake Ozaru, instead of a full moon.
-The powers of the "ki" rips-off the Airbender abillities style.
-The Dragonballs actually talk to Goku.
-Bulma is american. Totally different attitude to the series. She's more like a dumb Bond girl rip-off here, except that she isn't hot.
-Muten Roshi lives in an abandoned house.
-Goku is some kind of "chosen one" here.
-Roshi's training metods are nothing like the manga or series.
-Goku actually shows in-love attitudes towards Chi-Chi.
-Yamcha is even more useless than in the series. Plus, he's blonde and has no powers what's so ever.
-Piccolo's blood apparently can create story-undeveloped monsters.
-Goku's staff is never used but to punch a creature...only once.
-The ki blasts from Roshi are Firebender rip-offs.
-Goku doesn't learn to increase his Ki by himself.
-Goku doesn't get to do his famous Kamehameha in his first try.
-Goku and Chi-Chi kisses.
-Turns out the Kamehameha can be used to revive people.
-Goku's outfit barely represents the manga or series' one.
-Goku's hair is spiky, but doesn't help to make him look closer to the original.
-Goku's origin: after Piccolo's defeat, Ozaru somehow transformed into a baby human (Goku) so once he had 18 years, he would become Ozaru and serve Piccolo again...yep.
-Goku kills Roshi.
-Goku defeats Piccolo by using a Kamehameha, something that never happened in the original.
-Shenlong isn't long, and is a very stereotypical chinese Dragon.
-All the movie is wrong overall.

Dragonball Evolution is so bad it's entertaining to say the least. But be aware, it's one of the shittiest movies ever.

Ultraviolet
Ultraviolet(2006)

One of the worst excuses for a film, Ultraviolet is Ultrashit, featuring bland characters, boring story, clumsy and uncaring progression and really bad CGI. This is a complete waste of time.

Alien3
Alien3(1992)
½

After two nearly-perfect movies, the third Alien is just like the prisoners of the movie, scum. Nothing special here, all is more like a rip-off the first Alien, but nothing scary or impressive. Also, it grabs it's first minutes to destroy your expectations by killing all the survivors of the previous movie (Aliens) except of course, our main female lead. Plus, the Alien here is very unbelievable, not only is an insult, but also a dissapointing shit; plus the climax is underwhelming (and it's the best part of the movie). A very underwhelming film to say the least...or the most.

Aliens
Aliens(1986)

"You can't top something that's already perfect"
Well, this movie not only did top it, but also surpassed perfect.

Aliens is the prime example of best sequel ever along with The Dark Knight and Terminator 2 (also from Cameron). Ridley Scott's "Alien" was a perfect and apparently un-matchable terrifying experience; once i watched it, it quickly entered in my favorite movies of all time list. It was certainly thrilling and atmospheric, if not perfect, and once finished, it seems the sequel might only be able to equal the greatness. But as a matter fact, it way surpassed "Alien" in every aspect and also on it's own expectations.
All of what's good from the first is perfectioned here and creates more percect stuff from the hand of James Cameron. A great classic that stands as one of my favorite movies of all time and transformed Sigourney Weaver into a kick-ass female character and one of my favorite protagonists. To be a 100% honest, i know there's also Space Odyssey and other perfectionist movies, but no other movie has engaged me like Aliens did. The atmosphere, the special effects, the advanced cinematography, the epic and thrilling action-packed score by James Horner, the strong performances, the progression of the story, the epic climax, all ultimately delivers what i call a perfect experience. Sure, perfect doesn't exist, but Aliens is very close to make it so.

Set 57 Years after the events of the first Alien, Ripley is rescued from stasis in the remaining shuttle from the space ship Nostromo, by The Weyland-Yutani Corporation, the company were she worked. Due to lack of evidence and the destruction of the Nostromo, Ripley's story about the Alien they encountered is quickly recieved with much skepticism and as negatively as Manos: The Hands of Fate and most of Hollywood remakes by critics and audiences (nailed it!). Ripley's space-flight license is revoked and she works as a cargo loader. Contact with the now habitated LV-426 colony (colonized after no Alien race was found what's so ever)is lost, so the Colonial Marines are sent to an investigation mission, while also taking Ripley with them, as there exist the possibility of an Alien attack. After discovering that there are tons of Aliens, Ripley will have to learn that the only way to end with her nightmares are battling them.

The plot suggest tons of action, and it certainly delivers some of the best action sequences ever shot. However it still contains the tension and build-up from the first Alien, so it's more like a huge update. Also, there's little quantity of movies that can scare and deliver some good action, while also being overall well done. But Aliens is not only well done, it's mostly perfectly made ("mostly" because there's not such thing as perfect). First of all, there's a lot to admire and enjoy in this movie: the scenarios are awesome, they never feel like a park ride, you can feel you are there. Second, the Aliens are barely seen, but whenever they're on screen, they're awesome. Specially The Alien Queen, she's one of the best special effects in movie history. Third, of course, the awesome acting. Sigourney gives her all and ends transforming Ellen Ripley in one of the greatest characters in cinema. The rest is also great: Michael Beihn (Kyle Reese in The Terminator), Lance Henriksen, the crew of the Sulaco, etc. But a speacial mention to Carrie Henn as Newt, she is one of the most credible child actors and her character has a lot of strenght in the story. Oddly enough, she never appeared again in another movie since. But i guess it's because she knew that any other movie will be inferior. Fourth, the amazing score by James Horner. Fifth, the direction by Cameron (i think this is his best work). And last but not least, the awesome climax. I won't give away too much, i'm just gonna say it's awesome.

This is easly the best movie i have ever seen and i'm sure it may stay like that till' i die. It's hard to think that something as perfect as Ridley Scott's Alien could ever be surpassed, but James Cameron make it happen, transforming nearly perfect to definitive the closest to perfect as a movie comes. Aliens simply gave me an even more learner and grateful experience than Ridley Scott's original movie, an experience i thought could never be matched. Maybe you're thinkin' i'm way over-glanced by this movie, but time has passed since i watched this and i'm still convinced this is the most perfectionist movie i have seen, and thus, my favorite of all time. Sure you HAVE to watch this if you call yourself a critic or movie-goer. Aliens is for me the best movie ever, but if not for the rest, it can still be one of the best ever made along with The Godfather, Shawnsak Redemption, etc. Cameron, you have made a milestone in cinema forever.
Gotta love those Aliens. The bad thing here? What came after it: Alien3 (huh...) and Alien Resurrection (really average).

Gothika
Gothika(2003)
½

I can understand why this movie is bad, i mean, my God is it bad. But my brain finds this movie highly watchable and often a guilty pleasure. Dialogue is bad, but entertaining, performances are good, the story is convulted but you don't care. The characters are stupid but you laugh at that instead of feeling bad. And you got to admit that the ambience and atmosphere of the movie are well done...guess i like the blue color here and some of the darkness too. Also, the story development, although clumsy, is pretty interesting and comes to a somewhat fitting climax.
All in this movie is wrong, but i like it that way here. I don't know, this movie just turns my brain off and i kinda enjoy it, but i still know it's bad and feels overlong (and it only runs for an hour and a half).
I guess that the guilty pleasures of some people are unpredictible.

A Nightmare on Elm Street

Oh my god this was awful. The movie is boring, copying much from the original and yet nothing from it. This movie is simply boring, way too rushed and way too un-caring about itself.

While the original managed to at least build up some atmosphere and revelations, this one on the other hand simply jumps into explination, lacking any of the things that made the original a classic. Also, what's up with Jackie Earle as Freddy Krueger? His voice sounds like a narrator rather than a killer and plus, he is nothing when compared to Robert Englund. This movie thinks CGI is scary; it never is. This has to be one of the worst remakes i have ever seen. I'm not a big fan of the original to be honest, but i still can't believe how this remake just got everything wrong. It might last an hour and a half, but it surely feels like forever.

Anti-climatic, boring, rushed, stupid as hell and very dishonoring, this remake is nothing but a bad Nightmare.

In The Name Of The King: Two Worlds

I am AMAZED to see this film has so many inconsistences that there's not a single "OK" in this movie. The acting is bad, the story has no sense whatsoever, many plots and sub-plots are left in the air (such like the two worlds) and some sub-plots just hang on the celling until very end of the film when they reappear out of nowhere! Also, what's that of having the final battle in the kitchen with tedious choreography? Bad climax like any other Uwe Boll film, really an awful experience.

Hachi: A Dog's Tale
½

A very emotional and tear-drop story based on a real emotional story. Richard Gere gives a good old men that has an increible bond to his dog and even the dog itself plays his part amazingly good (all his versions). The movie is greatly emotional and wit enough to make yoy throw tears, but unfortunately it's very americanized as this is based on a real story that happened in Japan.

Shin seiki Evangelion Gekijô-ban: Shito shinsei (Neon Genesis Evangelion: Death & Rebirth)
½

Not much than a resumé of the series episodes 1-24 with some new details, but the best part is the 30 minutes of new animation representing the series' new ending tha follows. Only to Evangelion fans however.

The Twilight Saga: Eclipse

The action made it better, but still, the characters are abysmally wooden and the story gets to nothing we haven't see already, so it's a waste of time. A sad waste of time. Not to mention the story, it's terrible...almost sadistic.

Hey Arnold! The Movie
½

I don't know how they make the deep and wit TV series a boring, flat, turned-off movie like this. This is off-tracked from the series and instead tries to be a derivate from other movies, but doing that in first place is terrible. Not even Arnold and his advices can survive this.

Unleashed
Unleashed(2005)

The film can be very bipolar at times. The first 40 minutes are rude and action-packed. The next 40 are emotional and human development of Danny with his new family and the other 20 minutes are...the climax, pretty much.
The film tells the story of a rude fighter called Danny, who works for his "uncle". He wears a collar that keeps him calmed, but once removed, he unleashes his though fighting skills, killings included. In one of their money-recovering missions, Danny is left alone for some time, there he meets Sam, a blind but very nice person that teaches him the beauty of a piano. An car accident apparently kills his uncle and his henchmen, but Danny survives and later is found again by Sam, who take care of him from that moment on and now lives with him and his adoptive daughter, Victoria. The rest is pretty much Danny learning the piano, to cook, his past and to think of Sam and Victoria as his new family.
Jet Li acts a bit akward at the emotional moments, but leds to unintentional hilarious moments. Morgan Freeman is as charming as ever and Bob Hoskins delivers as the crude uncle. The movie suffers from pacing problems, familiar affair and not as action packed as other Jet Li movies, but the overall experience pays-off, giving the characters ultimately a hard time, but a happy ending ultimately.
I don't know if reccomend it or not, but i could say you should give it a try, you might like it, it's very entertaining.

Curse of Chucky
½

HALLOWEEN SPECIAL REVIEW

(THIS REVIEW INCLUDES MINOR BUT STILL IMPORTANT SPOILERS)

Curse of Chucky is a back to basics...yes, it features the same stupidness, silliness, un-scary feeling and dumbness of the first film. However, this movie is a huuuggggeee improvement over Seed of Chucky (this turns out is a sequel to that movie) and features a storyline a bit more complex, but only will be convincing for fans that know all the story of previous Chucky entries. Now, let's look at the story:

There's this invalid girl and his mother. They recieve a strange package that includes a Good Guy doll (we all know the rest). Characters come only to be killed and shit. However, is during Chucky's self exposition...sorry, "backstory" were the movie kinda starts to make sense and connects this thing to the other movies.

The special effects...well, are pretty good for a straight-to-video film...but Chucky looks silly. I mean, he looks like a little princess, (but that's probably because they wanted the doll to have Brad Dourif's facial expresions...they finally learned to use motion capture) however there's one moment in the movie where we see him with a more fitting look, scarred and everything (and it's very creative) so that one detail of Chucky's look is fixed through the movie.
Dialogue is bad, but not terrible. However, characters, as usual, are dumb as hell. Acting is sub-par, but the girl playing Alice does a good job, for a child actor; and Brad Dourif once again delivers a Chucky (this marks the second time he plays both Doll and human character) Music is really average, but it never gets to bother you or affect the experience.

There are huge nostalgic moments here and there: we have Andy Barcklay references, Tiffany and the classic Chucky NOT killing people in the best time, but rather in one were all can get worse for him...yep, classic Chucky.
The movie is bad, but that's part of the fun, it's classic Chucky "flavour" after years of shitty movies (Seed of Chucky too much?) and this movie represent a high standard for video-straight movies.

NOTE: There's a scene at the end of the credits...BEST CHUCKY MOMENT EVER!!!! This is one of my favorite halloween movies now (it's not scary, but it has that ambience), and also a guilty pleasure. Give it a chance, it's bad but you'll never regret to watch it. Again, WATCH THE END OF CREDITS TOO, I REPEAT: BEST PART OF THE MOVIE!
Overall rating in comparison? It's better than Seed of Chucky or Child's Play 3. Maybe also better than Bride of Chucky.

Alvin and the Chipmunks
½

It's all formula for kids, no fun, nothing overall for adults. This movie is more for kids...kids that have mental problems.

The Happening

The premise is extremely interesting, gets your attention quickly and gets you hyped for the discovering and conclusion. People is killing itself and all this has to do with something about a toxin...wow. And what is this terrifying horror?!...plants and trees...yep, just angry plants and trees that spreads a toxin that make humans to suicide themselves, because humans have became a threath for the planet...wow is that unconvincingly stupid. Not only that, but the acting is terrible, even talking about Mark Wahlberg, it seems the movie sucked out all of his acting abilities much like After Earth did with Will Smith. After the "big" revelation, you know, the angry plants, the rest of the movie is bland, boring and lacks any interest. Even the "climax" is too cheesy for me to take. How does this movie solve the toxin plot? By hugs, literally. The characters share a big cheesy huggie and it's all flowers and roses. It's as stupid as the rest.
The Happening is one of the weakest films i have seen and just one of the many Shyamalan's shitty shits. Let's just forget this movie ever happened...let's forget that The Happening happened.

Thor
Thor(2011)
½

Thor is not the best comic-book movie ever, it lacks much of the script abilities of other movies and its overall a good vs evil plot, but this is huge fun, it has some good humor and the actors give all of themselves to the movie, and that's allright, it makes this movie much better than expected. A fun and useful trip before the Avengers.

The Other Guys
½

The Other Guys does deliver some big laughs throught most of the movie, with the final act not necessarily so funny. Wahlberg and Ferrell are hilarious, as well as Johnson and the damn Samuel L. Jackson, even if the latter two only appear briefly in some very over-the-top scenes (the scene of the death of these two is also unpredictibly funny). Other actors like Eva Mendez could have use a more strong emotional ressonance, but is fullfied by Michael "The Batman-Beetlejuice" Keaton. The story i actually found it to be very original, and while is not fully exploited, it certainly uses a ton of funny ideas. It's not the funniest movie ever, but this seems enough to watch in a weekend, don't miss it when that weekend arrives.

Gravity
Gravity(2013)

Gravity knows how to work out a lot of stuff with a simple plot. Space movies recently have left little to no lasting impression, but much like Alien or Space Odyssey, Gravity leaves the audience with an unique experience, all this thanks to the tension, chills, thrills and realism that this movie has to offer.

The plot centers around two astronauts that after their shuttle was destroyed by some satellite left-overs, they are left as the only survivors. They have to reach safe space stations before another bunch of satellite left-overs arrive, all that with little time, supplies and lack of a lot of useful items. It sounds simple, but director and writer Alfonso Cuarón along with his son Jonás Cuaron knows how to manage such story into a tense sci-fi movie that drives us into deep space like never before.
No questioning of humanity, no evil machines, no alien monster, Gravity only works with the regular stuff: space, that's it. The much you can grab from this: the tension of being in the infinite, alone, with the danger to die by doing any tiny thing wrong, the lack of gravity, the violent it can suddenly become...Gravity works all this and much more.
Now the casting: only Oscar-winners Sandra Bullock and George Clooney are here. And that is enough for the film to work. It knows the potential of these actors and the movie masterfully puts them in characters only they could work with. Other cast includes simply voice-overs, and they do fine, whoever they are.

Special Effects? Simply awesome: it really feels like space, the shots of the earth and overall space along with the stations are incredible, also the scenes of disaster when the space trash comes are breathtaking and awesome. The movie knows that the special effects are not to show-off, but the help the movie. They certainly help Gravity to feel thrilling.
Now the musical score: Steven Price had composed tracks 100% accurate to each of the scenes, making a score that feels tense, dramatic, but hopeful and wonderful when it needs to be. This makes Gravity also a musical wonder, even when sometimes the silence works too.
And of course, the story: it's simple, but the progress is were it gets strong. It's mostly character driven, and the pacing gives the necessary time to everything, and character development are at its best. The camerawork its fantastic! The shots are filmed with such accurasy, amazing angles that capture everything and leaves the most important on focus too, also leaving a space for incredible earth-seen-from-space shots, the camera is masterfully managed in Gravity, and the dedication for this kind of works has only been seen in Kubrick's movies or Hitchcock's Rope.

Gravity however is not free of flaws, i mean, no movie ver is. The dialogue gets a bit cheesy at the end and while the movie is highly realistic, there's still some inaccurates here and there. Plus, one scene involving character Ryan (Bullock) escaping from a fire looks heavily computer-managed, sure, most of the movie is but this one shot of her escaping fire looks very unrealistic in comparison with the rest of the movie that creates geniune experience of being in space. But OK, this is a bit of nitpicking, at least it doesn't affect the experience at all.

Ultimately, Gravity is a master movie, it has done everything right and leaves the audience with an everlasting impression, and it's easly the best film i have watched in 2013. Check it out, it surely will be more an experience than a simple "sunday trip".

The Dark Knight

Perfectioning as much as possible. This is the movie's lesson. Nolan delivers the definitive version of Batman not only to fans, but to the entire world. Heath Ledger is the star here, his perfect perfomance as the Joker...they say a movie is as good as its villain, and this movie reflects that perfectly. Strongly and smartly writted, amazingly acted, thrilling, chilling, subtly action-packed and chaotic at the same time. This movie delivers everything. Probably the definitive comic-book movie, even with the Avengers on.

Push
Push(2009)

Push is one of those movies that had a very strong concept and you get surprised, if not bored, seeing how they waste such concept in a boring, long, convulted, incoherent, anti-climatic, silly, lacking and weak movie like this one. Nothing much to say but don't watch this crap, it's a waste of precious life time.

New Police Story (San ging chaat goo si)
½

This is one of Chan's first movies i watched, but never finished. After many years, it got better, and the result was very pleseant: a relentless, tireless, psychological thriller-action film with one of Chan's strongest performances and with a strong cast to back him up. The story was very progressive and had some surprises and a bitter-sweet ending after most of the movie is pure teenage-terrorism and psychological torture (to characters, not you). Ultimately, New Police Story delivers, even with its flaws.

Saw V
Saw V(2008)

Saw reached the point were the ideas have ran out and relies on plots from the previous movies, so what we see in Saw V is not a continuation of the story. but just a shit-load of flashbacks that only makes the story more hard to follow. I mean, Hoffman was also there the whole time? This is getting really convulted. The torture devices aren't even interesting here, the Pendulum was kind of clever, but the others felt like outdated versions of any kind of devices. Tobin Bell still delivers as Jigsaw, but unfortunately he's the only character that has interesting dialogue, the others just say stupid things, and to make it worse, they can't act. Overall, this is a tedious, tired, outdated and unnecessary sequel to a series that should have ended two movies ago. At this point, the saga was only 4 years old and it already felt it had run its course.

Die Another Day

This film has too much of everything: too many special effects, too many gadgets, too many plots, too many sci-fi stuff, too many of too much. This is a movie that instead of celebrating Bond's 40th anniversary, is damaging its reputation, by having Bond's dialogue on relying on pure exposition and akward one-liners and showing the worst elements of the previous films. It's also bombastic and too loud, plus Brosnan is on the edge of becoming too old to play Bond, but thankfully God this was his last Bond film...or sadly enoug, THIS was his last Bond film.

Never Say Never Again
½

I got to say Never to this Again and Again. So what if Sean Connery is back? If the movie is bad, it's bad. It lacks energy, excitement, climax and the story itself was already seen, and with the same actor!!!! Eon also has some bad Bond productions, but this is almost below the level of A View To A Kill or Die Another Day. Avoid this 100% unnecessart film.

Unstoppable
Unstoppable(2010)
½

A truly thrilling film which realistic factor is what makes it the winner, along with the presence of Denzel Washington and Chris Pine as the lead roles. If only that camera wasn't suffering from Parkinson all the time...I mean, it's crazy how many times the camera pointlessly zooms in and out while it shakes in almost every single shot. That was hugely annoying and it keeps going through the hour and a half. If it wasn't for this, the movie would have been almost perfect.

Doragon bôru Z 4: Super saiyajin da son Gokû (Dragon Ball Z: Lord Slug)
½

The fourth DBZ film is more busy with fighting, and that's good, but after a while it feels less exciting. However this gives a pretty good alternative on Goku's famous transformation and also a very interesting one. Another reccomendable DBZ movie.

Doragon bôru Z 1: Ora no Gohan wo kaese
½

To be the first movie, of course there's gonna be some details to be fixed, but the story itself is very interesting, and so is the following of it, but the villain (already a Dragon Ball familiar) is flat. A highly entertaining movie that acts more like a lost episode than an special story.

Green Lantern: Emerald Knights

Green Lantern isn't my favorite comic book heroe, but this film composed of short action-packed segments is huge entertaiment even for not-Green Latern fans, like me. At least it was far better than "First Flight"...damn whas that bad.

All-Star Superman
½

This Superman film has a very bipolar mood. It tries to tell one too many stories and the attitude of Superman is...robotic to be honest, i don't feel that's the heartful Superman of always. It also lacked some good old-fashioned action, but i guess this Superman movie succeeds because it adapts one of the "best" Superman stories (i didn't find it that good to begin with) and gives a different look on the Man of Steel. Only for fans, that's for sure.

Saw II
Saw II(2005)
½

This sequel changes a bit the plot, but not the concept. I was kind of intrigued by the final twist and some of the traps were highly more inventive, but all these new characters aren't interesting and the plot at times is confusing and very fast-tracked (characters are killed too fast with bare development). However this film seems to be a worthy predecessor, to a film once innovating. Toni Bell plays a great villain here, intelligent and twisted, but not crazy. It kicks ass. Saw II is nothing but a bit of an inferior sequel.

Saw
Saw(2004)
½

Saw is crime-drama with gore and some horror there, and a story a bit complex and twisted. This film is a mixed bag of opinions. It is good that it uses a crime drama plot and the excuse of all this being a "test" to have genuine gore, but still i don't feel that much satisfied, nor i felt this movie was very superb or anything, just a gory-crime drama horror story that you can see on TV these days. The twist at the end was sick and one of the movie's best elements, and while we get to the end, it does feel tense and intense. It appears this might be the best Saw film of all, so i guess i can give credit to that. After all, we all know how the sequels turned out to be...

Under the Same Moon

Heartful, charming, whimsical, realistic, crude but sentimental and with strong characters performed by strong actors. Under the Same Moon delivers it's purpose while also being a greatly filmed, well written, often hilarious and emotional movie.

Quantum of Solace

The sequel to the awesome Casino is short on the smartness, thrills and interest on characters and story. The action is amazing, but sadly it goes first too fast, then it disappears, and reappears at the last five minutes, its inconsistent. And also, why is Bond fused with Bourne elements? The last time Bond tried to mix itself with another saga was in Die Another Day, there they mixed it with xXx's style, and that didn't turn out well. It's an OK film, but just "OK", that's something a sequel to Casino Royale should've never be.

After Earth
After Earth(2013)
½

After Earth has to be the most average movie ever. It's even below Michael Bay's level of bad.
The story is lazy, so is its development, lacks potential, energy and care and it's dull as shit. The story is simple, and full of the most common denominator elements in sci-fi: Aliens invaded earth years ago and now is uninhabitable. After a clash-landing on the now plagued by dangerous creatures "Earth", only two survivors are left: our main wooden characters. One of them has to retrieve a cocoon to spread a call for rescue. The other gives instructions. Yes, they are father and son but who cares?
This movie is simply unbelievable, ¿How can you screw up Will Smith's charm? I don't know, but Shyamalan did it. It sucked out every single histrionic gif that Smith had and transforms him into the most average acting ever. Shit, you have Will Smith, one of the greatest actors of the modern times, and you have him sitting on a chair, acting like a lifeless moron through 80% of the movie? I know Smith came up with the idea, but fuck Shyamalan.
And who's our other star here? Jaden Smith, his son. Oh god, help me. Is there action? Very little, and it's not exhilarating at all, it's the most lack of imagination-action you can think. Does it thrill? No way it does. The music is...pretty good to be honest. Composer James Newton Howard does an incredible job, much like in the Last Airbender (another awful Syamalan film, there the score was the ONLY good thing), where he also composed the score.
So, overall, After Earth is a trashy movie that offers bland story, no ambition, no expectations, special effects that works only at times, bad dialogue, wooden Will Smith, bad actor Jaden Smith, undeveloped sub-plots, repetitive flashbacks, music that outshines every crappy visual, Will Smith on a chair for most of the movie, lack of twist, lack of action, lack of attachment, fast and boring pace, one note story and shit tons of other things.
It does have some good elements still: like i said, some of the CGI works at times and the final duel was a bit entertaining, but that is never enough, anytime. After Earth ladies and gentlemen, the most average and lackluster sci-fi movie ever. Not the worst yet, there's Battlefield Earth, Ultraviolet and others just to remember how low a sci-fi movie can be, and that After Earth almost, but not quite, reaches. The Last Airbender was worst in my opinion.
Much like everyone else, i was hoping for a twist at the end, but got none. I guess it's my fault for expecting too much from Shyamalan. Fuck you Shyamalan.

Superman: Doomsday

This movie ruins the most famous Superman events: his death and resurrection. The famous Doomsday only appears in the first 20 minutes and bum he's gone. The reign of the Supermen is stretched into one Superman clone and all comes down to a final match and little story-telling. But still, it's a fine animated movie: it has great animation, the battles of Supes vs Doomsday and Supes vs Evil Supes are great and it's very entertaining. Sure it steps away from the comics, but the experience pays-off. Also, the design are done by Bruce Timm! Good entertaiment, bad adaptation.

Justice League: Crisis on Two Earths

A merely passable movie. The animation at times is good and other times is stiff. The story needed more emotional moments, everyone's like "whatever" and the music is...bland. The only thing i liked from this was Batman and Owlman, they stealed the show on its entirely. Not the worst but obviously not the best either.

Troy
Troy(2004)
½

Lacks an emotional attachment and an ending as powerful as the action scenes, but Troy certainly entertains not when it comes in terms of story, but when it comes to the action, war scenes and spectacle, it does an incredibly great job, those action scenes are well choreographed and well constructed, a great element to feature a weapon battle between Brad Pitt and Eric Bana. How does it hold up as an adaptation of "Iliad"? Well, not good, but this is one of the most entertaining epics ever.

Justice League: Doom
½

A decent animated movie, but also a lackluster one. The premise is very interesting and it's well executed during half of the movie, but after that it becomes the classic world-domination stopping plot. The ending was very interesting too and the few changes it has with the comics doesn't seem to bother at all. Well done, but not the best of DC.

Superman vs. The Elite

The comic was far more shorter...and serious (i mean, the designs of the characters here...too cartoonish for what's supposed to be a serious story) but the story did also point far from what the comic did. Superman vs The Elite is a fun, well animated and poignant movie that anyone can enjoy. But of course, i prefer the comics here. That final fight was more bloody on the paper than in the screen.

Digimon - The Movie

I'm a big fan of this anime. I liked the first short. I liked the second also, and the third...well, shitty. But all these short movies edited and stretched into one film feels simply underwhelming. The animation looks weird, the narrative is clumsy, the story makes no sense and the focus is everywhere and nowhere at the same time. I love Digimon, but this movie is nothing but a bad edited Windows Movie Maker version of 3 fantastic Digimon short movies. What were they thinking by stretching 3 movies and from one? Make money for sure. However, this movie is a very special (and weird) collector's item for any Digi-fan.

Bad Boys II
Bad Boys II(2003)
½

A darker, crueler, gorier, dumber, more rude and racist movie than the first. Is wrong, yes, but also a bit stylish and fun, this second Bad Boys is a hugely constructed action fest with a story that won't train the brain cells and it's hard to try following it, but it's not entirely necessary to do so. Unfortunately, yes, it is quite underwhelming, but fun.

Friday the 13th Part 2

The second Friday the 13th movie is just like every sequel to a classic horror movie: really horrible. This movie has very uninventive deaths, the same stupidness, sillyness and cheesyness of the 80's teenagers and it's less satisfying than the first, which was also a mixed bag. This one introduces Jason as the prime killer of the series, but that's all it can be said about this movie. It's totally unecessary to watch, hell, the movie itself has no reason to be made.

I, Robot
I, Robot(2004)
½

A movie that has a lot to show, but not much to tell. I, Robot grabs little potential from its source material and concept and we fall into predictible sci-fi territory: the machines go self-aware...yeah, even in 2004 that happened already big time in thousands of movies. It does have some good details: the action is exhilarating and even sometimes exhausting, the acting is good (Will Smith is as charming as always) and the story progresses, even if we don't leave with a lasting impression. Not that bad, but neither something highly memorable.

Titanic
Titanic(1997)

Titanic is a bipolar film, but in the good way. It's fun as it is tedious (3 hours seems too much as well as not enough), it's hilarious as it is tragic, it's as comedic as it is dramatic, it's as marvelous as it is self-indulgent, it's as wonderful as it is serious business. This film is one of the greatest hits by Cameron (director of my favorite film of all time, Aliens) and is also one of the most commented, after all it used to be the hoghest-grossing film of all time, and we're talking about worldwide here. Titanic is epic and a film every cinephile must see or know. My complain? The same as The Return of the King: it takes a while to end. But overall, a great motion picture.

Ice Age 2: The Meltdown

Huge fun and even with little epic moments, this sequel might not have the seriousness that the original had, but the hilarious material works good. The characters still have things to do and the squirrel was 10 times more hilarious than before. The story has little progression outside of new character's back stories, but the rest of the elements feels enough to fill that hole. A movie that has fun with itself and shares it with us.

Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl
½

Very fun, much more than any theme park ever. The film puts Pirates and make them cool, awesome, interesting and multi-dimensional. A film that's as epic as Johnny Depp playing Jack Sparrow, now that's a commentary.

The Black Cauldron

This adventurous Disney film lacks almost all of what makes Disney animated features so good, such as the charm of the characters, the sense of wonder and the time given to the story. The voices are OK, the score is epic and the animation is as pretty as ever, but that's all this movie offers. A lackluster Disney film.

The Man with the Golden Gun
½

One of the most underrated films ever. This is not the best Bond film, but it doens't need to be. The action is good, though not exhilarating, the Bond girls are: one is barely used (Andrea Anders) and the other is the origin of the dumb blondie stereotype (Mary Goodnight); the score is, outside of the use of the 007 theme, forgetteable, and the gadgets, thankfully god, are abscent. The villain? that's the movie's strongest element; Christopher Lee plays an unforgetteable and audacious Scaramanga, he's one hell of a villain. Actually, this villain is very similar to today's villians: threatening, almost invincible, smart and cool, with some awesome gags in the dialogue. Overall, a 007 movie overshadowed by the villain and the participation of Clifton James (it's out of context), but this is a much better movie than what critics say. Pleasant.

Speed Racer
Speed Racer(2008)
½

One of the best guilty pleasures i have seen. This Speed Racer is overloaded, sometimes clumsy, sometimes silly, overall it's bad, but some kind of goodly-bad, so entertaining. You know this is bad, and yet you get to like it some way. It's really not awful, just bad, and it also has some good cast over there, so there's plenty of stuff to entertain you. But beware, as the word "guilty" never gets out of the experience.

Wrath of the Titans

A sequel that sucks slightly less than the first. Wrath has the same quick story, clumsy characters and lackluster action scenes, but lacks an epic tone, one that the first had at least. By the end, the only cool thing from here are the special effects, they are awesome.

Fred Claus
Fred Claus(2007)

A very unbalanced film with a good cast, but poor characterization. This film has some humor scenes, but doesn't quite work, the sentimental plot is predictible and the movie feels...like nothing. What a waste of time...i still wonder why Kathy Bates was in this...

Nacho Libre
Nacho Libre(2006)
½

Offensive? These guys don't know a thing about culture. Nacho libre is a hilarious trip, fun and entertaining, but also flawed and like many comedy movies, at the end it tries to reach an emotional state, but all it does is drive the movie away from what it should be. Jack Black and co-star Hector Jimenez give the movie very funny scenes. Sure, you need to know a bit of Spanish to fully enjoy it, but that's not a problem to me as i speak both languages, so fuck you! Anyway, fun movie, not perfect but again, it doesn't need to be, it's a comedy with Mexican flavour made by Amaericans...logical.

Cars 2
Cars 2(2011)
½

Jesus, that was terrible! Pixar has reached his most pathetic moment here, were they forget about charm, characters and decent story and start to think that spectacle is all. This is wrong, Pixar has never been so wrong and flawed. Cars 2 surely looks good, but doesn't feel good. i mean, a Spy plot? Are you kidding me? That's one of the most common denominator genres you can grab, it's one of the least options and just in case someone has ran out of ideas...Pixar has. This was a terrible film and a bad sequel to a middling Pixar film. It will be hard to recover from this...

Cars
Cars(2006)
½

It can't be the best Pixar movie, it surely lacks that something that other Pixar movies had: a learner, charming main character. This movie has a very weak main character, i never get connected to him. Second, the story doesn't feature many scenarios as usual and i think we needed to see a bit more of the world ruled by cars. But aside from all that, the movie holds up with great animation and a predictible but accepatble story-telling, and some greatly done chasing or trip cars scenes. Never the best, but always a guest, Cars is a movie that no Pixar afficionate would avoid.

Friday the 13th

Today is a Friday 13th, so to celebrate it, i watched the first movie of this long-running series. Unlike other horror-slasher series like Halloween or Nightmare on Elm Street (were the first movies are the best), this first entry in the series has too many problems to deal with. First of all, it's weird to watch a Friday the 13th movie where Jason isn't the killer (more strangely, this is the first of the series, how come the one from the second movie ended as the prime killer?), i guess we should blame the makers of the franchise as they over-used Jason in the rest of the movies, after all in a series as repetitive as this, i guess that's a fresh start. Second, the characters are stereotypical from the early years (there's not much we can know about them, other than they are really horny people getting killed by a NOT milf), the story as it comes has weak progression and the killings works only sometimes. Also i have issues with the logic of the people here: they're some weirdos!!! But i guess that makes sense if that's the reason to why kill them. And the other issue is the climax...it's weak. Overall, this movie isn't a strong beginning to a series that had a shit-load of repetitive sequels that only got lamer and lamer. However this might be one of the strongest films in the franchise. If a movie like this is one of the strong candidates, then you cna guess the rest of the series doesn't have much to offer...other than a crossover with Freddy that's half-lame half-entertaining a a shitty remake.

Bleach: Fade to Black, I Call Your Name (Gekijô ban Burîchi: Feido tô burakku - Kimi no na o yobu)

A pretty cool movie with a very interesting plot: an important character dissapears and everybody save for Ichigo remebers that she ever existed, and in the way, the whole world also forgets about Ichigo, a not problematic excuse for cool fight scenes. The story was well developed, the animation is great, the soundtrack is great, and the whole movie feels satisfying. I really have a great time watching I Call Your Name.

Naruto Movie: Guardians of the Crescent Moon Kingdom

This movie has an unnecessary feeling all over it, specially the use of characters like Rock-Lee, that feels like a cheap Sasuke substitute. As you can see, i'm not a big fan of Naruto at all, so i will judge the movies by pure critic view. The story was actually kind of interesting, some of the action scenes were also very cool and the animation holds up, but all this is nearly overshadowed by a cheesy dialogue and lack of substance. It's entertaining, but not entirely necessary.

Naruto the Movie: Ninja Clash in the Land of Snow (Gekijô-ban Naruto: Daikatsugeki!)
½

This first Naruto movie doesn't have much stuff to surprise or excite me. The story was kind of clichéd, the princess was bland, the villain was nothing special and even the action lacks some choreography. Still, is entertaining and i guess it can easly please fans, but this movie sin't a big BIG screen arrival.

Dragon Ball GT: The Movie - A Hero's Legacy

This short, much like the GT series, tries to copy the first Dragon Ball adventures, but fails in excitement, and we have the feeling of being there already. The movie isn't strong or charming, but covers a part of the story we all somewhat like. The ending scene with Goku Jr. and Goku is the best part and one of the best Dragon Ball moments, but other than that, the movie has nothing good to offer.

The Adventures of Sharkboy and Lavagirl in 3-D

This film is cheesy, campy, way too childish, way too overloaded with bad 3D effects, way too over-the-top and the acting is garbage. The story? I don't think they writted one. This movie is bad, really bad and only for kids...very pretencious kids...i'm not gonna lie, i liked this as a kid (i was barely 9) but every year from there i started to see and each year was i was more indifferent to this. A film so miscalculated and over-bloated that's just too much of too much, and yet nothing.

Night at the Museum

This movie is OK to children, it's kind of OK for me too, but not the enough to make me care or to make me go over its very cheesy tone. Overall, it has charm, but widely focused to young people.

Robots
Robots(2005)
½

It could be a charming adventure, with some hilarious moments, but Robots is ultimately a derivative of many other movies, with all and its clichés and some ridiculous-not-funny scenes and some predictible robot puns and jokes. The voice cast at least is good.

Dragon Ball - Sleeping Princess in Devil's Castle

A movie not so Dragon Ball charming-ish, but still quite entertaining for the humor moments, and an alternative to Goku and Krillin's friendship start. Not the best, but guess it doesn't need to be.

Birdemic: Shock And Terror

This has awfulness to the EXTREME!!!!! The acting is very very baaaaaddddd, wooden and stoned. The story is non-existent, it has many pointless scenes that the director mistooked for character development, the music is boring, and the effects are some of the worst seen in recent years, even the Nintendo 64 generates much better birds. This is awfulness at its best, and its horrible just to think this exist and was actually made by humans! But, i would lie if i say it wasn't fun to watch. Watching its level of badness is a great timewaster and has something loveable about it...whatever it could be it makes the movie more a fun ride than an awful experience, which it is.

The Human Centipede (First Sequence)

A truly gross film, but no scares or true tension, other than the one your guts is going thorugh trying not to return the food you just ate.

The Wolfman
The Wolfman(2010)
½

It has some good scenes, but this movie about one of the most classic monsters is weak, bland and is a bore. This should have been the great return of the classic man-turned monster.

The Little Rascals

As a kid, i loved this. As the adult that i am, i still love it. I can't avoid it, i love this film. It's whimsical, fun, charming...it's part of my childhood.

Dragon Ball Z: Broly - The Legendary Super Saiyan (Doragon bôru Z: Moetsukiro!! Nessen retsusen-chô gekisen)
½

Determined by many as the best DBZ movie, Broly has all the elemts that make Dragon Ball Z an incredible anime. Strong and heavy action scenes, humor, breathtaking satisfying and fantastic. This movie creates everlasting memories.

Dragon Ball - The Path to Power

This remake of Dragon Ball features great animation, action, adventure and humor, and is a great nostalgic movie for fans. A truly worthy Dragon Ball movie.

Last Order: Final Fantasy VII
½

A great complement to the story of a great game. The animation could use a bit of effort, and the music is overly forgettable, but the outcome is satisfying for any Final Fantasy fan. And there's the problem, if not a fan, this isn't for you.

Evangelion: 2.0 You Can (Not) Advance

Boasting a more constant character development, action scenes and references and changes from the series, 2.0 improves upon the previous film with more new characters and with time to re-introduce and develop even further the old characters, making them freshier. And the climax...the best part of the film. It puts everything at it's best and excites everyone as it progresses. A film no one can forget after watching.

Caligula
Caligula(1979)

Oh my. This is awful at a very VERY high level. This movie takes all possible porn and put it here...yeah, my head exploted also when hearing that this movie was pretty much about it. This is suppose to tell the life of a king but...no, it's wrong, ALL ABOUT IT IS WRONG!!!! The movie loses at the very begining, in the middle and in the end. What was this made for? Was it a bet? Like Manos? Oh...this is...bad, really bad. Well, those sets are incredibly done to say the least...and that's it. The rest is pointless.

Back to the Future Part II
½

It's mostly a recap of the first, but still is very enjoyable and fun, and adventurous too. A good sequel but not that great.

Dragon Ball Z: Fusion Reborn
½

Toriyama and staff decides to exploit more concepts and here we have one at its best. Fusion Reborn has enough substance, action, humor and colorful experience, as well as probably the strongest character in Dragon Ball history: Gogeta. This is some of the best of DBZ.

Forrest Gump
Forrest Gump(1994)
½

Implausible at times, often problematic with character depiction, making them hard to be loved, and sometimes slow, but ultimately very charming, heartful, cheering and entertaining, if not satisfying. Forrest Gump is in the best of Tom Hanks' career and one of my favorite Robert Zemeckis' films.

Rush Hour
Rush Hour(1998)

It's OK, both leads perfectly understands each other and it's entertaining at least, while not exhilarating as i would expect from a Jackie Chan movie. At least is better than the sequels it spawned.

Ratatouille
Ratatouille(2007)

A charming, delicious and enjoyable Pixar film. Ratatouille has all the cheerful elements to entertain kids, and all the serious stuff to entertain adults as well. One thing that helped was the setting: Paris, just perfect for a film like this, and the french environments really help the experience. A film that's very well crafted and can be watched a lot of times.

Back to the Future Part III

A different, but accurate sequel and final film for a great trilogy. Back to the Future III is an adventurous, fun, entertaining and superb ending to the trilogy, closing as a very satisfactory trilogy. A movie, in my opinion, better than the second film, as this one doesn't borrow any plots from the first one. And remember, the future is whatever you make it, so make it a good one.

Swing Vote
Swing Vote(2008)

Sometimes effective, but ultimately Swing Vote is a boring, not enough funny ride, with the worst plot you can put on a film: Political issues. Who cares about politics in a movie? Madeline Carroll gives a good performance along with Kevin to offer a bit or relief.

The Da Vinci Code
½

A very dissapointing movie, with an intriguing story but ultimately told in a very despicable way, anti-climatic situations and a lackluster conclusion. Weak.

Rush Hour 2
Rush Hour 2(2001)

A fun and entertaining movie with elements to keep us confortable, but not entirely satisfied. Not very special, but good to kill time.

Dragon Ball Z: The Movie - Broly: Second Coming
½

The sequel to Broly isn't as exciting as the original, but still features strong action, power, humor and some drama moments. The climax is very emotional and something no fan will ever get out of his head. For DBZ fans that is.

Dragon Ball Z: Super Android 13
½

For DBZ standards, the story feels very short, but the movie has action and the characters we like to see fihgting, but the conclusion is already predictible. This can't kill any affition, but surely does nothing to increase it.

Dragon Ball Z - Androids: Bardock the Father of Goku

Not heavily constructed, but knowing and seeing how the Saiyans died and how Goku's father tried to avoid all this is very satisfying for fans, and possibly, this is the origin story of Dragon Ball, after all, the events triggers the first Dragon Ball as well as the Frieza saga later.

Dragon Ball Z Bojack Unbound

Epic and emotional many times, Bojack Unbound is packed with action and power, becoming of the best DBZ movies, as well as telling an alternative story of Gohan's Super Saiyan 2, a fan favorite. Something i can reccomend to everyone.

The Bounty Hunter

This movie works on auto-pilot. Predictible, weak, unfunny, boring, and abysmal. This movie left me with a very empty feeling...how could they?

The Midnight Meat Train
½

For a horror movie, this one is actually very original: a midnight train were horrible things happen. This gives chills and scares unlike any other you could possibly had. Like many horror movies, it gets lost there, and the outcome is bland, (i mean, reptile creatures? Really?) but the blood and gore fest is very good and tasty for those who want a scary movie (no pool intended) and also is one of the few horro movies to have action, BUY ME THAT!

Doragon bôru Z 11: Sûpâ senshi gekiha! Katsu no wa ore da (Dragon Ball Z: Bio-Broly)
½

This thrid coming of the fan-favorite Broly is weak on many spots, such like fighting, personality and substance. The film feels derivate from other animes instead of its own.

Dragon Ball Z: The History of Trunks

Expanding the DBZ universe, we have a very emotional, action packed and unforgettable story that connects to the actual storyline present in the anime. There's a lot of good details here: the animation, music (directly from the series), fights, emotion and the main character, Trunks, a fan favorite. Can't ask for more.

Doragon bôru Z: Kono yo de ichiban tsuyoi yatsu (Dragon Ball Z: The Movie - The World's Strongest)
½

While the setting doesn't help the experience, the movie features the characters, humor, fights, crisp animation and entertaiment we all can expect from the awesome DBZ.

Dragon Ball Z: Wrath of the Dragon
½

A very climatic and extremely fun and satisfying OVA with all our favorite characters and a story actually going on in less than an hour. That's some talent over there. Also, got to mention the animation quality, it's THE BEST!!!! Highly detailed draws and well made scale and very fluid animation with great coloring...this is why Dragon Ball Z is the best anime ever, it's all about quality.

Doragon bôru Z 6: Gekitotsu! Hyakuoku powâ no senshitachi (Dragon Ball Z: Return of Cooler)
½

This Dragon Ball Z tries the Frieza saga with a different enemy and all in 45 minutes. The movie is highly-action packed and dialigue is left in second standard, but it's well writted. A very fun and entertaining Dragon Ball Z OVA (Original Animation Video).

The Hot Chick

Bland jokes, stereotypical characters (after all, it's a movie with Rob Schneider), offensive, dumb, stupid, unfunny, ridiculous and simply too much and too little for any viewer. Oddly enough, this is one of Schneider's less worse movies, and that's saying a lot.

Star Wars: The Clone Wars

And we thought the prequels were bad! This movie is a clapboard, literally, cause none of the characters shared the feeling of being there, the action was dull, the score (reprises from the original films, considered some of the greatest musical score ever made) was horribly reprised. This movie has also an extremely weak script, is pretty much just do this and that, even the prequels had more fun scripts. And the voices? The ones from the movies are OK, but the others...OMG, Hayden Christensen acted better (and he's bad). If you want to love the Star Wars prequels, you can watch this to do so.

The Magnificent Seven

An often unfocused, but very sharp, strongly scripted Western and featuring some of the most exhilarating shooting scenes, a very memorable musical score and a legendary cast working together, the Magnificent Seven is one of those strange classic movies that went overlooked on its time, but has survived, as people started to see how well put-together the film is. It's like a yesterday's Expendables, with the exception that The Magnificent Seven uses brain before action, and knows when to shoot something and when to give some good story progression. A very classic and highly reccomendable film.

Nazis at the Center of the Earth

Some of the very worst shit ever, and with NAZIS!!! This film has a boring pace, story and characters, with bad acting, horrible special effects and lack of any exitement. The thing is this movie is so bad is hilarious, every second there's something to laugh your ass out, specially that poorly generated robo-Hitler-thing that belongs to movies like Birdemic. If you're going to see it, do it by your own risk, this can destroy your hope and faith in movies.

The Rundown
The Rundown(2003)
½

The Rundown (Also more widely known as Welcome To The Jungle) is that rare, sadly overlooked action-comedy film that works in many departments were other films have failed. The Rock is just as awesome has he has always been, and the co-star William Scott also gives a sometimes funny (and annoying) buddy to the main character. The thing here is that all the characters actually play a complementary part of the story, they are not there just to fill the movie. The plot is predictible, but fun to follow, and for a movie like this you would expect some Indiana Jones rip-offs, but The Rundown doesn't have any of those, in fact, more is given to action than treasure hunting, which i thank. Talking about action, this movie has some of my favorite action scenes ever, with a choreography so good and so original it kicks more than ass (and we're talking about The Rock performing those scenes). The only problem is that it doesn't take any new ideas, but neither it repeats ideas form other movies (if we take out the story-telling). Thank God this movie has good writing, not at the level of The Dark Knight or Skyfall, but well put-together the enough. A very reccomendable action flick.

Rambo III
Rambo III(1988)

A movie about bullets, punches, blood, violence and one-liners...cool. However this Rambo is kick-ass but even dumber than Rambo II. This time i give more credit for being very entertaining and fun to watch. Nothing good, but with all the entertaiment, why would you want it to?

The Legend of Zorro
½

Over-the-top fest, with predictible plot, writing and weak characters, and tiring affair, with some very cartoonish action scenes and some cartoonish characters and a cartoonish feeling most of the time. That's all Legend of Zorro is.

Hard Candy
Hard Candy(2006)
½

Full of strong performances and an uncanny sense of anguish and thrills, but also a movie that let things in 50/50. Evrything in this movie is good, but the experience didn't pay off by me. There's something about Hard Candy that is good, but also bad. The thing that made it so good also makes it bad. Don't know why, but this film leave a lot of feelings, all mixed but with no clear result. Probably is because i don't gravitate towards this kind of films, i more often go with stories were is clear why did the story happen, and if case of leaving it in ambiguous, it's satisfying, but here is not. A film i don't know what to think of, but surely nothing to make it better.

Rambo: First Blood Part II
½

Very violent and less caring than the first, this second Rambo started a large genre of dumb action movies, thank God we know who to guilt. This movie has the idea of changing The Rambo genre from thrills to dumb action. To be fair, it's entertaining, dumb, but fun. A very bad sequel to the awesome and thrilling First Blood.

First Blood
First Blood(1982)
½

First Blood is one of those movies that thrills you to death (how ironic) while having over-the-top things like explotions, bullets and all that shit. This Rambo is different from the other three movies it spawned, it's darker, more serious and way more realistic, as well as more explored. Sometimes i felt the musical score didn't help some scenes, and the edning could use some epilogue scenes, but overall, the film is one of the best form Stallone's career and is thanks to this that we will always remember him as Rocky and Rambo.

Sex Pot
Sex Pot(2009)

An overly unfunny, weird, vulgar, perverted, trashy porn-not porn movie with no purpose other than piss us off. Only a company like The Asylum (The masters of Mockbuster) can do this kind of crap.

Bad Boys
Bad Boys(1995)
½

A very average, not very inventive buddy-cop movie that somehow works thanks to Smith's and Lawrence's charm on camera and entertaining B-movie details. You can't ask Bay for more.

Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children

Bad narrative and lack of smart dialogue. But who the fuck cares, this movie is a huge orgasm to anyone who has played and loved Final Fantasy VII. All the beloved characters are here, it's action packed, has good music, good voice acting and the return of Sephiroth! A great and highly entertaining movie for fans, but for others it might be just a long viedogame cutscene.

Garfield: A Tail of Two Kitties

If you think the first Garfield movie, with all its badness, was too generous, here we have a sequel that's even worst. No fun, no satisfaction, nothing. Only made to squash money out of us.

Rocky V
Rocky V(1990)

Rocky tries the back to basics premise but here it doesn't work. On the other hand it tries the father and son premise and...it's a bit OK, but nothing is accomplished. Rocky V is like...a story in a film that should be anywere but Rocky, it just doesn't feel Rocky-ish. While there's something that makes it entertaining, the result feels empty and lacks any satisfaction. Easly the worst of the Rocky films.

Garfield - The Movie
½

The movie is as lazy as the icon it's based of. If it were also as cool as the same icon...but instead we have a poorly executed movie with dated jokes, unfunny gags and a lack of entertaiment. I send this movie to oblivion!!!

The Medallion

Let's mix bad writing, plot-holes, unfunny and annoying Lee Evans, bad CG, over-the-top elements, cheesyness, overly made music, unsatisfaction and clumsy crafting. In the way, let's throw Jackie Chan's charisma and awesome acrobatics to the garbage and out of this mix. What we have is The Medallion. You like it? Of course not.

Jason X
Jason X(2002)

This is the most ridiculous horror movie i have seen in a while. Jason X tries the sci-fi territory...i couldn't even go with that. The movie has very bad special effects, it's extremely cheesy, is stupid, it's dumb, it's terribly scripted, all this at a huge level that it mostly looks like a porn parody of a horror movie combined with sci-fi. Gee...this is very very bad. This kind of movies should only be made by Joel Schumacher!

Superman
Superman(1942)
½

A very toned-down Superman short. You could expect for more, but this is all we get. Dissapointing.

Superman
Superman(1942)

One of the very first shorts i watched, Japoteurs has the vantage of being nostalgic and a very intriguing plot. A plane taken by Japanese "baddies" and with the plan to crash it. Inside, there's only the classic trouble-finder Lois LAME in danger and Supes trying to stop all this. How does he do it? Now there's a reason to watch this short.

My Girl
My Girl(1991)
½

Average stuff with kids talking about anything but kid's stuff...still a very interesting movie to kill time if you can hold the cheesyness and its sudden twist into a dark film...

Superman
Superman(1943)
½

The final short should have been much more well crafted, but i guess i couldn't ask more from Famous Studios...it's OK, but noir and Superman makes a dark and some times, very angry short to finish. Gee...

Superman
Superman(1942)

My favorite Superman short, it has everything: Superman talking, doing Superman stuff, the dumb Lois, a giant Godzilla-like monster and a very constant sense of emotion. Reccomended to everyone and for those that doesn't know how to spend some 8 minutes.

Superman
Superman(1942)

Superman is more ashamed of the quality decrease of this short than with his underwear outside of his pants, but B.D.L. is still a very good Superman short and thankfully God, the quality was recovered in the next short right away.

Superman
Superman(1941)
½

A less perfect but still very excellent Superman short featuring Superman fighting robots and a very dumb bad guy. If that is not fun, i don't know what it is.

Garfield
Garfield(1987)

Garfield tells a very clichéd premise, but executes it in a very unusual way. Another fun animated feature with the laziest cat ever.

Garfield on the Town
½

The premise of Garfield living in a scenary 100% different form his normal living is very interesting. And Garfield on town is the answer to: is it good? Well yes, yes it is.

Here Comes Garfield
½

A very uneven but fun animated feature, with everyone's favorite cat. It also has a very wonderful voice cast and it's fun for ALL ages. Well done.

My Girl 2
My Girl 2(1996)

Let's make a movie about the girl's first (second) love....i don't get it neither. Let's just say this had no reason to be made. Pointless story, bad characters, why do you want to see this?

Superman
Superman(1943)
½

After many crappy shorts, Superman gets a good treatment with Underground World, with a dark scenary, an unusual plot and Supes back in action.

Superman
Superman(1943)
½

...seems now the Superman shorts are more about WWII propaganda than comci book stuff...

Superman
Superman(1943)
½

Superman and mummies? No thanks.

Superman
Superman(1942)

Just another bland average Superman short, howeber it's a bit of fun and only runs for 8 minutes, it's not a timewaster anyway.

Superman
Superman(1942)
½

The worst of all the Superman shorts. The story isn't that clear, the Super moments are anything but Super and the overall tone of the short is boring. How we passed from something like the first short to THIS?

Superman
Superman(1942)

Greatly crafted and still greatly animated, this Superman short can be taken as some sort of Superman vs a minimized King Kong, and that is AWESOME!

Superman
Superman(1942)

A less ambitious Superman short, with a plot involving a natural disaster and Supes doing what it does best: saving people of it. Predictible, not very original, but good.

Superman
Superman(1942)
½

Not much to say, it has Superman, the overly kidnaped Lois Lane, the clichéd mad villain, etc. With all this, i don't think you can have a bad time.

Superman
Superman(1942)
½

A much simplier short and not as good, but still a Superman worth adventure of 7 minutes. However this won't won Supes any fame or fans.

Cartoon Craze Presents - Superman: The Bulleteers
½

The Fleischers' Fifth Superman short is highly entertaining and lives to the quality of the previous shorts by presenting quite a bit of original criminals here, that uses a FREAKING BULLET CAR-PLANE TO DO THE EVIL!!!! That's got to worth your time.

The Longest Yard

Adam Sandler? ugh...he isn't funny anymore. But to be fair, this movie has some style and it's very watchable and enjoyable. But if i have to qualify this movie by the experience, i'll send it to CIRCUMCISION!!! Another good candidate for timewaster or time-killer.

Across the Universe

All i have to say is the following: ¿Characters? Boring. ¿Story? Boring. ¿The Beatles tributes that make the movie much much more enjoyable? They're Welcome.

Freddy vs. Jason
½

The movie is not terrible, it's just really average. The scares aren't present, the dialogue is bad, the characters are bland and for the first hour of the movie, it feels more like a Friday the 13th-only movie more than a crossover. However, the movie has a 40 minute action scene that gives the movie's title justice. Robert as Freddy and the confrontation between both slashers are the only good things this movie has to offer. I reccomend to skip the movie's first hour and go damn straight to the showdown, the rest is boring, pointless and unnecessary. A great timewaster.

Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers
½

It's badly entertaining. Unfortunately, it's actually more bad than entertaining. The film runs a tired formula, the characters got more jump scares than Michael, the franchise's killer star, and it has pointless scene regarding character's sexual experience...now that's completely unnecessary. Actually, the whole film is unnecessary. The little girl (Danielle Harris) actually gives a good convincing performance along with Donald Pleasence as Dr. Loomis, but that is not even close enough to make the movie worth your time. Avoid it.

Big Stan
Big Stan(2009)

An overly bad movie even by Rob Schneider's level of awful. Big Stan combines action and bad comedy and the result is the pointless Big Stan. Avoid this stereotypical, offensive and overly unfunny movie.

House of Wax
House of Wax(2005)

Sometimes is terrifying, but never reaches any thrills or scares, someting that many movies don't understand: a horro movie must, i don't know, SCARY! This one like many others, think that putting gore is equal to have scares. It's a lie, please understand, IT'S A LIE, scares is something that we feel can kill us even if it's only a movie...This movie sucks by the way.

Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back

Awesome sequel. All of what was good from first is not here...instead, better stuff is crafted. A truly epic space film that knows a sequel must be better in everything, not just for money, but by pure will to make it better.

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King

A very climatic, truly epic finale to one of the greatest fantasy stories ever written and ever filmed. Return of the King easly overshadows its early entries by increasing the action, the war scenes and the emotional writting. It has the best war scenes i have seen in my life and the finale itself covers all grounds. And there is the problem: the movie overstays its welcome at the endings, 7 times i was fooled by the movie, thinking it would end but turned out to be a bridge to another ending scene. But at any rate, this movie stands tall, and makes all 3 Lord of the Rings movies a highly epic trilogy. A truly epic trilogy.

G.I. Joe: Retaliation

The action is a bit less inspiring than the previous film, but the Rock is enough to cover that. The rest wrong with Retaliation is the following: weak script, weak characters, inconsistencies, cliché as fuck, under-use of stars (Channing Tatum killed at 15 minutes in the movie and Bruce Willis almost non-existen participation) and a sadly uninspired climax with no intensions of making us any excited for the next movie. A very empty experience to be true. Nevertheless, it has The Rock to provide at least one good element to the movie.

Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time

Not the highly constructed adventure i was expecting, nor the good writing it should have, but Sands of Time has enough videogame references, entertaiment and passable acting (not talking about Ben Kingsley or Alfred Molina, they did great here) to overcome its notable failures, and even if the narrative is overall in many places but short, it's a better narrative than other videogame movies like Mortal Kombat or Resident Evil. Average and forgetteable, but you'll have a good time watching this movie, give it a shot.

Walking Tall
Walking Tall(2004)

A wit yet very lackluster film. It surely has big problems that keep it from being a toal success, like the questionable morality and simplistic story-telling. Yet a good movie to kill time.

Doom
Doom(2005)
½

Doom? Sure, the movie is Doom-ed. Lack of story, character development, and more like a pastiche of Aliens rather than an adaptation of the videogame; this movie has The Rock as its only good detail, but nothing it can presume to everyone.

The Game Plan
½

A heartfull yet very unfocused comedy easy for childs, very difficult for adults to take. Again, The Rock has great charisma that makes the movie a lot better at least.

Toy Story 3
Toy Story 3(2010)

Pixar comes back after many years on hiatus, and delivers an uncannily superior sequel to the previous two. 3 manages to top the humor, score and much more of the previous films and blends them into a nearly-perfect finale and incredibly satisfactory film that worth the 10 year waiting. A movie that transformed me back to a kid and made me cry as such. Incredible.

The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader

It was fine by me. It was adventurous, it had great special effects, great performances and a great musical score too. It was also a bit long, lacking some sword and sword fight at the end and some underwhelming-ish in some places. But as an adventure film, it was great for me. A film i could watch several times.

Jurassic Park III

The third coming of the dinosaurs is short on new ideas, it lacks any sense of wonder, it has no surprises, it's unfocused and all messy. Not even the return of Sam Neill makes this any better. I don't know if this is worst than II, but surely is extremely inferior to the first Jurassic Park. A lackluster movie, that's what III is all about.

Smiley
Smiley(2012)

A really bad horror movie with no surprises, many dumb moments, pointless jump-scares and lack of tension. The ending sets a sequel that no one will watch and that we just couldn't care the less. A very VERY forgettable movie.

Pacific Rim
Pacific Rim(2013)
½

Guillermo Del Toro's new film has the problem of leaving characterization and some character psychological development out of it, but giant robots against monsters has always make anything better, Pacific Rim is a perfect example of it. The special effects, hands down, the best of the movie. However this was an uneven experience for me, sometimes ruined by unintentional plagiarisms. This movie has an uncanny resemblance to Neon Genesis Evangelion, one of the greatest animes ever that explored the human existence and of course, had giant robots, piloted by humans using a mental connection, the stronger the connection, the better they fight; when the robot is injured, the pilot feels the pain. And it doesn't stop there: the monsters sometimes also resembles the Angels from the same anime and some of the dilaogue and camra shots were also very VERY similar. I, being a great fan of Evangelion found this a not so right, but for those who doesn't know Evangelion, this is a movie they will enjoy, as i did nevertheless. It was huge fun, indeed, and with that it worths the two hour and eleven minutes of runtime. A great film by Del Toro.

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers
½

A great adventure-fantasy film, one of the best to be clear. The story manages to take like a hundred characters and develop all of them pretty well. The action scenes and war scenes are some of the best done in Motion Picture History, the score is epic and awesome, the acting is strong, the dialogue is all-middle age stuff and the sense of magic and fantasy is at 100% in satisfaction. While it can be overlong at times, it worths the nearly 3 hour trip, thanks to that final battle in Helm's Deep, which i qualify as one of the best war scenes ever in history of cinema. Its minimum failures are overcome by its greatness. A great sequel that's bigger and better thah the first, which was also a lot fantastic.

Blue Streak
Blue Streak(1999)

Kinda fun, dumb, but fun, lack of consistency on jokes, but fun, lack of affair and focus at times.......but fun.

The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian
½

A bit more of an excellent adventure with more action and more care to characters other than the four Pevensie. Another epic movie with stuff i like: middle age references (like The Lord of The Rings), swords, shields, wars and lots of magic. If only the dialogue wasn't so predictible or clichéd...

The Karate Kid Part II

The chraming and emotion of the first is long gone, but the movie still develops both Daniel and Miyagi as characters and puts an interesting premise. Also that final battle of apprentice vs bully apprentice is very interesting, and in some point of view, is not really bad, just inferior to the first. After all, it does tell a different story instead of repeating the same formula and continues the story formed by the three Karate Kid movies. So i guess we have to give credit to this sequel for at least not being a "been there, done that" sequel.

Pokemon the First Movie - Mewtwo vs. Mew
½

Pokemon The First Movie is nothing but an excuse to make money and gain the series some undeserved popularity; don't get me wrong, it's just that the story is so inexistent, the progression is inconsistent, the characters are annoying and the premise of Mew vs Mewtwo is a sucker, it isn't as exiting as the poster that promise us an epic battle, but is just to suck you in, so, a movie with all these flaws can't possibly deserve more fans other than children. Sad.

The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe
½

A truly epic fairy-tale type of adventure mixed with Lord of the Rings and The Wizard of Oz. The Chronicle sof Narnia has adventure, has armors, swords, shields, talking horses, centaurs, a wise lion and a lot of imaginative things to overcome some of its failures. It surely will become a classic.

Pay It Forward
½

Boring as much possible and with a horrible ending...do i need to say anything else to make clear that i don't like this movie?

The Secret of NIMH

A dark, yet charming and dead-serious animated film, NIMH is a masterpiece, one of the best movies ever crafted by human hands and deserves to be praised forever. Maybe the ending could use a little more footage of the valley but why should that bother us if the experience was done by then? The best film by Mister Bluth.

Hook
Hook(1991)
½

Spielberg's Peter Pan is often strange, but also very original and with many ways to exploit it, which this movie thankfully god does. The scenes are campy, often kiddy, but admirable and entertaining. The story is weird, but very useful to the movie's plot. And character development is many times troubled, but ultimately filled. What completes Hook is the adventurous feeling that it has, and i love that in a fantasy movie: the adventure and progression from where they start to where they end up, seeing how characters changed and how the circumstances also did. In performances, all does great, specially Robin Williams, but the kids playing Peter's son and daugher feel shy. The movie also has a nostalgic feeling into it, so it can please newcomers and old fans as well. I reccomend it for weekends. All publc allowed.

The Phantom
The Phantom(1996)
½

Even if the movie has Billy Zane and Catherine Zeta-Jones, it just can't help the movie to hide it's ridiculousness in almost every way you look at it. The action scenes, principal in a super-hero film, here are quite slow and tedious, the special effects looks like made with very little budget, the acting by part of the villains is terrible and the script and execution of the movie has much trouble to solve. Yet i must admit it sometimes boasts to be highlighted as a "not that bad" movie after many years, in comparison with other average super-hero films. But seriously...purple? That's nothing subtle for a hero named "The Phantom".

Once upon a Time in Mexico
½

Fuelled with an amazing cool cast in an interesting setting and with Depp stealing the spotlight? OK, this is cool allright.

Wreck-it Ralph
½

This film is full of nostalgic video games as well as emotionally powerful, this towards the relation that Wreck-It Ralph develops with little Vanellope through the movie, that was extremely cute and warm, of course, it had to be a Disney film. The premise is very clever and original, and executed almost flawlessly, the only problem is that the premise gets lost in the middle of the film, but later recovers anyway. This is probably a film you should watch before you die. A film for everyone who likes videogames and those who only want to see a good movie after many bad movies this part of the year (2012).

Warriors of Virtue

Though featuring an epic setting and good intensions, Warriors of Virtue is unfortunately full of boring dialogue and philosophy, stupidness, inconsistencies and the worst of all, the fight scenes have a blury and fame-skipping contrast, making the movie extremely dissapointing and frustating, that the only good parts are unconfortable to watch.

Charlie's Angels - Full Throttle

Cheesy, overloaded, unessessary, ridiculous, steriotyped, campy and predictible, but at least has some energy, unfortunately thrown to the edge at full throttle in cost of an actual plot or story.

Naruto Shippuden: The Movie (Gekijô ban naruto: Shippûden)
½

A great premise is thrown for more action and other stories that are too pointless that you can't care about. Much of the dialogue is very obvious and characters are uni-dimensional, the story had a good stamina at the begining, but lost itself into the premise of Naruto's death (and never happens, so what's the point?). Sadly, is very dissapointing.

Pokémon 4Ever

Sweet animation and music, also the battles are pretty entertaining,but...the problem of 4Ever is everywere else. The story lacks any adventure or good dialogue, damn, the dialogue is so stupid and cheesy. The new villian is extremely awful and the use of Pokemon Celebi is very bland, and it's supposed to be the film's most delightful detail, he appears on the poster doesn't he? And also, the overall ride is dissapointing and pointless to go throug, even tedious. Many scenes are only to show a bit of spectacle, without giving the story any progression, it only gets stuck. Don't watch this unless you really have nothing to do in half-and hour.

Pokemon - The Movie 2000

Pokemon 2000 improves over the first by offering more situations, yet still without story or charm into the characters. The story seems pretty loose and the movie can't get it anywere. Sadly, the voice acting is annoying and the animation feels dated. Just a little step foward, that gets stuck again really quick.

Planet Terror (Grindhouse Presents: Robert Rodriguez's Planet Terror)
½

Robert Rodriguez? The director of Mariachi? Of Once Upon a Time In Mexico? OF SIN CITY? I'M IN!. Its very over-the-top style, unusual visuals, unusual script and execution are the best of Planet Terror, a very unique zombie-apocalypse movie that's very enjoyable and fun while gruesome and gory at the very same time. But again, that's why is so good, it's unique, it's fresh and more original.

You Don't Mess With the Zohan

Sandler...aghhh, i wonder when are you going to do a good movie. So, what's about Zohan, well: it's funny at first, later is not, also full of tired, offensive stereotypes, so that's an automatic fail. Done.

Cradle 2 the Grave
½

Oh, is this boring. Even featuring Jet-Li doing action, is still boring. Even if the lead actors have good lines, is still boring. Even if Gabrielle Union gets half-naked, is still boring (but not problematic). Even if the story-line had strenght, is still boring. As you can see, there is no way Cradle 2 the Grave can be saved. It's dumb, obvious, boring and pointless overall. What a waste.

Addams Family Reunion

The entire cast replaced is enough reason to avoid this disjointed, boring and unnessessary sequel. Also ¿Tim Curry as Gomez? Nop. Simply no.

The Lion King II: Simba's Pride
½

I'm sorry, but this Lion King is ridiculous, and is messing with other themes that just don't belong to this kind of movies. I don't know if i can be proud of this...no, i can't.

Bunraku
Bunraku(2011)
½

Interesting, but blandly executed, bad acted, lack of characterization, lack of development, lack of coherence, lack of script...it lacks everything a comic-based movie has to have.

Kronk's New Groove
½

Lacks everything that makes the original charming. Nevertheless, it's somewhat fun,but unsatisfying.

The Emperor's New Groove
½

Not as fun or charming as other Disney animated features, but this film has a good pace and enough colors and familiar-good animation to keep on. Many details were wrong, yes, but is not like it makes this film bad.

Home Alone 3
Home Alone 3(1997)

This film has no reason to be. It features (unfortunately) a more cheesy tone and less enjoyable jokes and traps. Most of the times, the scene that are supposed to be funnym are not, more like if a message writted by the film makers saying "Laugh at Us! Please!" is present on those scenes. This is a film you just can't enjoy at any level.

Home Alone 2: Lost in New York

While a bit repetitive at times, the second Home Alone is still a very enjoyable film, bigger than the first, but dumber as the same. Nevertheless, it is not only a fact, but a guarantee that you will enjoy this film a lot if you liked the first.

Home Alone
Home Alone(1990)
½

Home Alone is a kid's film classic and very likeable for the rest of the audience, features the enough rudeness and kindness to survive and be at least more coherent than other films of this genre. A film that can make you have a good time.

Happy Gilmore
½

In my opinion, Sandler's most hilarious film, and probably one of the very few i like from him. The jokes are very sathirical and has some style, a very likeable style.

Pearl Harbor
Pearl Harbor(2001)

Much of it it's just explotions and emotional scenes, leading the story as a standby phase...but it's an amazing spectacle.

Life Is Beautiful (La Vita è bella)

The movie perfectly pictures the ups and downs of life and the main character is very charming and delightful, but maybe a bit unrealistic, and so, not so likeable. The movie however holds up to what it wants to tell instead of going off-track, something many movies fall into. A great film that deserves to be watched for generations forever after.

Misery
Misery(1990)

Misery is one of those effective suspense-horror-scary films that has art all over it. The dialogue cleary knows how real people would feel if this story happened. While actor James Caan does and excellent job as Paul Sheldon, perfectly reflecting his horror, it could not be completed without Kathy Bates as the psychopath Annie Wilkes; both made this movie literally. James is convincing as Paul, it's like he was that tormented man we see there, and Kathy is scary as hell in this movie. One of the best Drama-Suspences i have ever seen, and one of the most convincing and satisfying.

Clockstoppers
½

The movie has several problems that would surely make me see the movie much worse in coming years, but as of today, i still find it very entertaining and much inspiration to creative minds.

Dinosaur
Dinosaur(2000)
½

While the visuals are very amazing and gives some gloriously gorgeus shots, Dinosaur is very oring, this thanks to 1: the story, is bad and, ¿does anyone care? 2: the characters, very uninteresting and some are even akward. And 3: the movie is feels generic, not enough human emotion and feels veeeryyyyy slowwwwww. Dinosaur is a film i can't reccomend you, only if you're a...computer-generated visuals fan...

Cosmopolis
Cosmopolis(2012)

Cosmopolis has some quite good direction out there, if only it could come in instead...Much of the film has a clumsy progression, bad transition, stupid and uncomprensible actions and situations, terrible morality and sporadic overcome. Robert Pattinson is lifeless, so is his characterization; the novel had a more deeper Eric. Much of the movie has things i don't understand, much of the events are weird and creppy at times; i don't think the movie nor the novel were about that. Ultimately, Cosmopolis is a bad film, a really bad one that had an interesting premise but lacks any charm or understanding, a total waste of time.

Paranormal Activity 2

It mostly repeats much of the first film, so the outcome isn't that much better. Still, is interesting just to see what happened before and after the first, but i was hoping for much more.

Kung Fu Hustle

Features a lot of inventive Kung Fu fights and one or two funny jokes, along with some interesting cartoon-ish stuff all around it. The Result: a very entertaining, funny, different kind of Kung Fu movie to kill time.

The Passion of the Christ

A truly epic story obscured by the violence and graphic detail. Well, this is the thing: the actual Passion of the Christ was even more bloody and gory, so i don't bitch around this fact. Outside of being a christian, i rate this movie for the elements of a movie: story: epic, one of life, love, death and resurrection. Dialogue: revitalizing, accurate, interesting, and loyal to the bible. Effects: do i need to say anything? Score: extremely epic by the hand of John Debney. Acting: convincing and with lots of passion (no pun). Overall, this movie is not perfect, no movie is, but this movie's objetive was to let clear the greatest act made on human history, if it did, then it did well. A movie not for the faint of heart...i mean, it does had a lot of gore...well, some asshole that likes to see religion and gore all together: here's your home.

Total Recall
Total Recall(2012)
½

Visually impressive and with many action sequences. Characterization is bad, humor is abscent, pacing is sometimes abysmal and it just simply doesn't feel like an accomplished movie. The Nostalgia Critic once said " I'm here to talk about Total Recall. The original, not the crappy ass remake that I haven't seen, but I'm sure is crappy!". Well, yes. It is crappy. A very forgettable remake.

Paranormal Activity
½

I can see why many people didn't like this movie: because it scared the shit out of yourselves. Well, yes, nobody likes to be scared, but if that's the point of the movie then i don't get it people. Paranormal Activity has the right concept to accomplish scares and is executed only where it should. Done with low budget? Oh, that's good.

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

Not so good for many reasons, such like the movie focusing more on Wonka than Charlie (then why was it called CHARLIE and the Chocolate Factory?) and the weirdness of Depp being a bit too hard to take on here, but the visuals and the songs are enough to keep us in our seats, entertained.

Your Highness
½

This movie is a combination of middle-age action, modern unjoyable humor and tired sex jokes, yet the result is not that boring neither, this actually takes some laughs at times and, well, it's a movie that can be watched many times. It won't won any fans or anything, it's just a guilty pleasure. More guilty than pleasuring.

Paranormal Activity 3
½

The middle is mostly slow-boring build-up, but after that is where the film gets interesting, with more thrills than scares, but still OK. Yet this is nothing new.

The Hangover Part III
½

It wasn't as horrible as i thought it would be, but neither it was as compelling as i thought it could be instead. This finale does make the circles come to a close and goes on a different direction from the first two, which i thank the makers. It did make me laugh but only just smile, not laughing to death like in the first. The story is...OK, it's a dark comedy after all. This film was better than Part II but we needed something really really good, not something like this. Not horrible, but not so good either.

Happy Feet
Happy Feet(2006)

Not very interesting, i mean, there are penguins, not Skipper-Kowalski-Private-Rico level. But the movie is adventurous and has some really epic visuals, which are enough to make this movie highly watchable. Don't get influenced by this commentary, give it a chance, you might like it.

Winnie the Pooh
½

Short, very short, on runtime that is. This movie takes us back to the style of the old animated movies from early years, and that is a very heartfull experience, i had a great time with this movie, even if it is too childish. Actually, that helped the movie to work. Great job by Disney, sadly this movie is his last animated feature, so it could become a classic in years...let's made that.

Mean Girls
Mean Girls(2004)
½

This is a very surprising movie for me. This is a very smart, well crafted, well acted, well executed teen movie that really works. Some of the best of Lindsay's declining career. I mean ¿Writted by Tina Fay? Nice. Waters' direction also deserves a thumbs up. Well done, well done.

Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 1

Another slooooooow boring and abysmal movie with nothing but vampire porn and depressing tone, great way to make a movie, let's get the awfulness out as much as possible. That's our lesson here. Again, this comment is outside of the anti-Twilight affair, it's a genuine opinion as a movie critic. Well, i did feel sad about Bella but then i remembered it was Kristen Stewart and the feeling was gone, i'm sorry, but her acting is nothing emotional, nor is the rest of the cast. This movie is not only bad, it's awful. The worst of the Twilight, a saga not that good either.

The Twilight Saga: New Moon

Now this is awfulness at its best. The second Twilight takes boredom, slowness, wooden characterization, bland execution and lack of emotion to a new level. The story is bad, the dialogue is insanely inappropiate and really bad, the effects are abysmal and it takes forever to get to the end credits. Women? Who cares, pretty faces is all they're looking for. Outside of the anti-Twilight affair, this movie as a movie, it's bad, really bad, a very awful experience.

Hostel
Hostel(2006)
½

Oh noes, this isn't as disturbing as they say. It is entertaining and i thought that killing the killers of this movie by the hands of one of the main characters was a pretty cool idea, also the kids being muggers. I would punch those motherfuckers to death. But Hostel wasn't the terrifying experience they told me it was, for me it was toned down from that point. Yet it's watchable, if someone can hold the guts and all that.

Bride of Chucky
½

The concept now has changed a bit, there's more ideas and it's more likeable than the other Chucky movies, but still, this is more for the fans than new audiences, so be aware.

Ice Age
Ice Age(2002)
½

A funny, sometimes emotional and nostalgic adventure animated film, Ice Age represent how a weird concept like this cna work if these elements are put together with effort. A movie i could watch several times.

The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 2
½

A much enjoyable movie because of the action...yeah, it has action but no good characters, story or any other detail, it fails in the same departments as always. Yet this movie is less awful than the others, not good, but certainly not as horrible as the second and fourth film. Overall it's a lackluster ending...to a bad story, but the action this time is good enough to overcome. Thank God this is the last.

Twilight
Twilight(2008)
½

When this came out, it wasn't that bad, it was simply a book-based movie that grossed well at the box office, that was it. This movie is somewhat well done, but awfully executed, when it was released it wasn't a pain to watch it, just a little boredom, but with a great outcome. From all the Twilight movies, this is the less ambitious with the women audience and doesn't have as much unlikeableness as the rest. A waste of time? Yes. ¿Watchable? A little bit. ¿Satisfying? At some point. ¿Reccomended? No.

Madagascar
Madagascar(2005)

Not the best of Dreamworks, specially after Shrek 2, but this movie is midling entertaiment and some of the jokes works, and features some unforgettable characters (the penguins) and a very cathcy song (I Like To Move It) so you can have a good time here with that.

The Spongebob Squarepants Movie

It's not as funny as the hilarious TV Series (its first seasons at least) but the movie represents some entertaiment for grown-ups and huge fun for kids or fans. Much of the humor is hit or miss, but that doesn't seem to be a problem...i guess.

Child's Play 2

And this is what i was talking about: a dumber sequel. Not only it repeats the same mistakes (and overall the concept) of the first movie, but falls into new mistakes. Nothing but the same movie all over again, just dumber.

Men in Black
Men in Black(1997)
½

Very interesting and involving, Men In Black is one of those rare-well executed films that became a huge hit and a widely remembered success, all thanks to the story, concept and Will Smith with Tomy Lee Jones as the stars.

Child's Play
Child's Play(1988)
½

A sometimes original, yet dumb horror flick. Child's Play is just the beginning of a seires of movies that gets dumber and dumber, as well as less scary and more ridiculous. The acting is sub-par and the tension leaves to nothing, so why watch it? Eh, it's a bit of fun, dumb dumb fun.

Gladiator
Gladiator(2000)
½

I love this kind of movies, with swords, shields, and all that stuff of the middle age, it's always awesome. I bet if Manos The Hands of Fate had swords and shields, it would be a more watchable movie. Well, Gladiator has swords and shields but also an emotional plot, great action scenes, great cast and an incredible sense of awesomeness all around, a movie i can watch many times and never get tired of it. Actually, it's better than i remember...only a good movie is able to deliver such feeling.

Child's Play 3

The movie tries to change scenary...and that's it, the rest is the same killing, curse break and death, only, you guess it: dumber. Really really dumb...

Catwoman
Catwoman(2004)

Extremely ridiculous, silly, stupid, inconsistent and ultimately unlikeable at any rate. This movie is just as bad as Batman & Robin; i don't know how much you have to suck to be compared with such gigantic piece of shit, but this one managed to be sucky enough to.

Seed of Chucky

The ridiculousness reaches a new level in Seed of Chucky. The scares are forgotten and instead, it falls into bland and tired pop-culture references, incredibly bad jokes and lack of any kind of interest. Thank God no Chucky film has arrived since this.

Men in Black III
½

A great and satisfying return to the franchise after 10 years of absence, MIB III is entertaining and has the charm that got lost in MIB II. The lead is now made by Smith with Josh Brolin, and works as fine as Smith-Jones from the previous two, thanks to Brolin's performance that delivers. A very good third film in comparison with other "3" films.

Men in Black II

A very bad example of sequel. Men In Black II feels uninspired and lacks energy, funny jokes or charisma. The film itself feels forced many time, and that is pretty bad...Will and Jones still delivers nevertheless.

Hitman
Hitman(2007)
½

Convulted, action-clichéd, inconsistent and not engrossing, that's all Hitman has to offer. Sounds good right? Right?

V for Vendetta
½

A very impressive and well executed story sometimes overshadowed by political story issues, but a great effort is noticeable, and that's to celebrate.

Jumper
Jumper(2008)
½

Offers entertaiment for less-demanding viewers, and that's about it. Jumper lacks a strong story, characters or any development. This had it's chance, but failed. You can't expect much if Hayden Christensen "acts" as the main character.

Paul Blart: Mall Cop
½

Anothe rmovie that doesn't understand what good dialogue, effort or funny jokes means. Funny only when Kevin James hits something.

Sherlock Holmes

Downy Jr. is the star, no doubt. The movie has enough thrills, action, smart dialogue and characterization to entertain its 2 hrs, 9 minutes runtime. A fun film for the time.

Superbad
Superbad(2007)

Funny and hilariously vulgar, Superbad recovers my faith in teenager party movies with a smarter dialogue than other movies of the same kind and well use of gags and sex jokes. Sometimes is gross, but at the end, it's a movie better than expected, even if you watched it many times already.

I Am Legend
I Am Legend(2007)

A very effective movie with the charisma of Will Smith and a very emotional story that engrosses everyone around. Those creatures could use a little bit more of CGI, but the experience is still thrilling. A worthy film.

I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry
½

Much like many Sandler movies, I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry is not entirely funny or self-respectful, fails several times and has many offensive stereotypes and ridiculousness that makes it not funny, but shameful to watch.

Zombieland
Zombieland(2009)
½

A very hilarious, funny yet serious comedy about Zombie apocalypse that's smarter and more consistent than other "comedy" movies, and of course far better than the TV Pilot...that was horrible but anyway, Zombieland is a genuine comdey that makes you laugh to death (no pun intended).

Daddy Day Care

Sometimes its funny, and some of the funny moments were actually funny, but the movie is mostly made of tired jokes, lack of energy or satire and a very clichéd plot. Some good stuff there still.

The Dark Knight Rises

The Dark Knight Rises has much of everything you can have in a great finale: twists, emotions, sub-stories, hype, a great spectacle, pleseant and human characters, and of course, an amazing conclusion. Much of the comic is also present, and also other characters with satisfying usage in the story, such as John Crane A.K.A The Scarecrow. Many back story is used also, like in any great story, with very clever reasons to be shown. Nolan ends his Batman story like any other saga has done: it closes all circles and the ones left are for public interpretation with some clues given by Nolan and Goyer. The score is familiar, but that's a good point, and the villian's theme, Bane, is used much often. Speaking of, let's talk about characters. The knowns, Batman/Bruce, Alfred, Gordon, Fox etc. does as much better as before and their conclusion on their stories are clear and satisfying. New characters, like Bane, gives a proper and perfect performance by Hardy, but seems to never meet Ledger's Joker, but let's not compare, that was a different kind of villian. Anne Hathaway delivers a different Selina Kyle, but that's good, there aren't any cheesy moments with Batman, only romantic and with a bit of fashion. Marion Cotillard and Joseph Gordon characters (Miranda Tate & John Blake) are full of mysteries that got clear and both performances are amazing, you feel their ARE the characters they perform. Ultimately, all characters are clear, delightful and dark (like Bane) and everything is not what it seems. Not onlt the best of Nolan but the best of Batman. Many will compare this with The Dark Knight, but that's unfair, all three Nolan's Batman films are different as they tell a different story and has a different tone. This film in terms of quality is greater than The Dark Knight, but just like the size of a fly wing, both, or should i say, the three films doesn't need any comparison, they only need to be praised as the master pieces they are. Thank you Nolan and Bale, for everything and for completing the Batman legacy that will be unbeatable for years, maybe forever...

The Terminator

The Terminator offers android action, hyper-energetic action scenes an a very unusual storytelling that works. This was more than enough to launch James Cameron's director career and Schwarzenegger as the bad-ass action actor, so you figure out how good this movie is.

Batman: The Dark Knight Returns, Part 2

This epic finale of Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns satysfies all the fnas of the first, featuring the same darkness and greatness of the previous film. A movie that fans will never forget.