• Blade Runner 2049 (2017)

    Are you seeking a remedy against sleepless nights? You won't need any prescriptions to solve your problem. You simply need to watch Blade Runner 2049. Almost everything that could be wrong with a movie is wrong with this one. To start on a positive note, the visual effects are faithful to the original film, the directing is precise and doesn't feature any annoying contemporary shaky camera passages and the last third of the movie quickens up the pace and is at least slightly interesting. These three positive elements explain my rating but I really had to think very hard to find these reasons.

    Let's talk about this movie's massive problems. First of all, the film is way too long and takes nearly three hours to tell a story that would have justified a length under a hour and a half. The original movie wasn't the most fast-paced genre film ever made but it was bearable with a length just below the two-hour mark.

    Secondly, the plot is quite tiresome and can be summarized in three sentences. When things finally could start to get interesting, the film actually ends without a resolution. This makes me fear the worst. It's quite probable that there will be a sequel to this sequel which means that even those who haven't appreciated Blade Runner 2049 might feel forced to watch the sequel to know how the story actually ends. If you don't want to go through that dilemma, don't watch Blade Runner 2049 in the first place. While the original film is overrated in my book and doesn't do Philip K. Dick's novel justice, it had at least a coherent plot diagram featuring an exposition, rising action, climax, falling action and resolution.

    Thirdly, the movie tries to be overtly atmospheric but ends up being pretentious. There are numerous shots when characters walk through decayed landscapes in slow-motion. This idea might work every now and then to emphasize on the dystopian future that serves as setting but the idea is overused and prevents any momentum or pace to build up. The original film was slow as well but also had a few emotional and vivid sequences that contrasted the bleak vision of the future.

    Fourthly, the soundtrack of this movie is awful despite being written by renowned composer Hans Zimmer. Whenever the movie is dragging on and showing the main character walking through empty buildings for five minutes, the soundtrack suddenly gets louder for no apparent reason but to keep the bored audience awake. This surprising effect got my attention in the beginning but after it was used for a third time in a row, this strategy became laughably predictable. The present soundtrack tries to capture the essence of Vangelis' gloomy compositions for the original film but doesn't even manage to be a rough blueprint of the original score.

    Fifthly, aside of Harrison Ford's character who returns in the last third of the film when the pace quickens up a little bit, most of the other characters are quite pale. Especially Ryan Gosling's characters is so faceless that you won't care about his destiny at all. Jared Leto's villain character seems to be stolen from a weak episode of a science-fiction television series of the late sixties at best. The few interesting side characters such as Carla Juri's are underdeveloped and only have a few minutes of screen time despite the film's epic length. It's quite ironic that the most interesting character is the main character's holographic girlfriend played by Ana de Armas. The original film had several memorable performances by less talented actors like Rutger Hauer who were pushed by a great director while this film doesn't have that chemistry despite the skilled personnel involved.

    It was a pain to sit through the entire movie. I felt like walking out of cinema numerous times but I stayed because I had paid for it and because I was expecting a surprising ending. Now I know that I should have walked out. Despite the great director involved, several outstanding actors and actresses on board and even one of the best soundtrack composers in the history of cinema, Blade Runner 2049 is boring, hollow and uninspired. The original film was overrated in my book but this sequel is plain horrible. It's a mystery why this film got such a solid critical acclaim but hundreds of negative reviews prove that I'm not the only one who disliked this vapid flick. For me, Blade Runner 2049 even beats the shallow Kong: Skull Island in terms of negativity and is what I consider the worst film of the year. My suggestion for you is to read Philip K. Dick's novel instead of spending any money on this disaster.

    Partager via Gmail Delicious Technorati Yahoo! Google Bookmarks Blogmarks

    votre commentaire
  • 400 Days (2015)

    I'm glad I didn't buy into the numerous negative reviews and purchased this film that seemed to have a very intriguing plot. I must say that I even got much more than I expected. 400 Days convinces with a gloomy and mysterious atmosphere, four distinguished and interesting main characters and a challenging plot that doesn't give you all the answers. The movie actually takes its audience serious and requests multiple viewings and the use of your brain. The number of analyses, questions and theories around the movie on the internet only underlines the film's intellectual touch.

    Why did the movie get so many negative reviews then? Of course, some people might just not like it. The film doesn't have any stunning special effects like so many other science-fiction films. The film didn't have a big budget and the settings aren't much developed. While the actors and actresses are doing a solid job in my book, there isn't a particularly outstanding performance and you obviously won't find any big names involved here.

    However, I suspect that most reviewers rated this movie down because they literally didn't understand it. You can identify those people by reading sentences like ''The movie didn't have a proper ending!'', ''How is it possible that the Moon got destroyed?'' and ''The behavior of the characters doesn't make any sense!''. The movie does have a clear ending that makes you think and that makes sense once you really think about it. The explanation that the Moon got destroyed doesn't have anything to do with what's really going on. And the characters react very emotionally because three of them are receiving drugs and because specific planned events are supposed to trigger their exaggerated reactions. 

    I won't give any more information than this and there might be several similar interpretations of the film but it's important to understand the movie by looking at its whole essence and the things that are said in the beginning instead of taking every statement each character makes literally.

    If you are ready to explore a science-fiction movie with an experimental, intelligent and interpretative plot, you will be surprised by 400 Days. If you are looking for a spectacular science-fiction movie with a big budget and perfectly clear answers, you should better watch another shallow Star Wars or Star Trek sequel or stick to popcorn cinema fur juvenile minds such as Guardians of the Galaxy.

    Partager via Gmail Delicious Technorati Yahoo! Google Bookmarks Blogmarks Pin It

    votre commentaire
  • Ghost in the Shell (2017)

    I haven't read the manga yet but as a fan of both dystopian science- fiction stories and Japanese culture, I decided to watch this movie yesterday. It was overall entertaining but on the other side, it offered more of the same if you are familiar with science-fiction scenarios.

    The story is basically a mixture of Blade Runner, Equilibrium and maybe Tokyo Gore Police and therefore highly predictable. A young female cyborg called Mira Killian, who works as a major for an anti- terrorist bureau in a futuristic world, finds out that she wasn't saved but rather kidnapped by her creators. The beautiful soul in her disposable shell is searching for a sense of life. She tries to find out about her true identity while also chasing a mysterious hacker who is manipulating cyborgs and robots across the city to execute members of the company that created Mira Killian. She will have to choose sides in what might be her most personal case.

    While the plot isn't all that convincing, the acting performances are at least of an average quality. Scarlett Johansson isn't as convincing as in Lucy but even an average performance by her is still above average in general and you will also sympathize with her character. Pilou Asbæk had played alongside Johansson in Lucy and he does the same here and this time around he has a bigger role and does a great job as cool special operative with a dry sense of humor. It's also a pleasure to see Kitano Takeshi on the big screen and Japan's most legendary contemporary actor does a great job as rough and resilient Chief Executive Director.

    The movie focuses mostly on its visual special effects and portrays a futuristic city without a soul. One gets to see many quirky cyborgs, complicated machines, colorful screens, elegant vehicles and sophisticated weapons. The film actually looks closer to a video game than to an actual movie. Everything is very artficial and superficial despite being technically and visually stunning. In this case, the shell looks beautiful but there isn't any ghost inside. The movie actually makes you feel hollow at times but I suppose this was intentional and that's why I won't criticize that in this particular case. The different characters soon realize that they are living in a fake paradise. The underlying message of the movie is that too much technology will make humanity regress instead of progress which is an important statement in the early twenty-first century.

    In the end, Ghost in the Shell is an entertaining dystopian science- fiction movie with an important message. It clearly isn't the bets of its kind but it also isn't the worst. Genre fans should be pleased while those who aren't familiar with that kind of movie will surely start to explore this genre further after watching this film that might serve as an appropriate introduction to its genre. Overall, I still wasn't impressed enough to actually check out the manga of the same name.

    Partager via Gmail Delicious Technorati Yahoo! Google Bookmarks Blogmarks Pin It

    votre commentaire
  • Life (2017)

    Even though ''Life'' really follows classic science-fiction standards by the numbers, it's a really engaging movie. Yes, the first twenty minutes take the time to introduce the settings and the characters. Obviously, the rest of the movie focuses on the monster that is going to kill the crew members one by one. It's as predictable as it gets when I'm telling you that the atmosphere inside the vessel will be intense, that there will be a few breathtaking scenes taken in space and that some characters will be ready to sacrifice themselves in order to save others. Of course, the famous lead character is the one to survive until the end. And yes, there is going to be an inevitable twist at the very end. On the other side, I must admit that the movie didn't follow all the wrong stereotypes. There are no unnecessary side stories such as emotional conflicts between the characters that act in a rather mature way and we are not exposed to a cheesy love story either which makes the characters more believable.

    Despite some flaws in the predictable story department, this movie in the vein of the classic Alien flicks still deserves to be watched on the big screen. The visual elements in the vessel and in space never fail to impress me but also have a realistic touch to them. Special effects such as body horror elements and explosions in the space station are added in small and efficient doses. The fact that ninety-eight percent of the film take place in space give this movie a refreshingly streamlined approach and since ninety-five percent of it are taking place inside the vessel, the film develops a claustrophobic vibe. This atmosphere is enhanced by a subtle yet gripping soundtrack. The characters feel down to earth and are portrayed accurately by the actors and actresses. They might not deliver the best performances of their careers but manage to give the movie a realistic touch. In the beginning, I was skeptical that the plot seemed to rely on a cast that absolutely needed to be multicultural which feels unnaturally forced in many films but it makes sense in the context of an international space mission.

    The most interesting element about this film is obviously its antagonist. Instead of introducing us to a big and strong monster in the key of Alien or Predator, this extraterrestrial life form constantly evolves its behavior and shape which adds to the rising tension in the movie. The fact that the monster acts unpredictably yet intelligently and learns very quickly about its survival instincts and tactics makes it a genuinely scary opponent. The monster's capacity to adapt to any threat makes it so respectable while its physical appearance is so unspectacular that it feels quite realistic.

    In the end, apart of the predictable story line and the first twenty minutes which are necessary to introduce the setting but somehow lack intensity, Life is an atmospheric, intelligent and realistic science-fiction-horror movie that will please those who love classic material like the Alien and Predator franchises.

    Partager via Gmail Delicious Technorati Yahoo! Google Bookmarks Blogmarks Pin It

    votre commentaire
  • The Happening (2008)

    Shyamalan might be one of the most unstable contemporary directors in terms of quality. There are some of his movies which I disliked completely like ''The Village'' being wrongfully advertised as a horror movie even though it's a slow-paced drama. Other movies are quite overrated like ''The Sixth Sense'' that has its moments but isn't that compelling once you have figured out the predictable twist. Then again, Shyamalan has also directed some films that are close to perfection like the intense ''Split'' with its claustrophobic atmosphere. And then there are some of his movies that I like quite a lot but which are extremely underrated. ''The Happening'' is exactly this kind of movie.

    What I liked about the movie is that it didn't include a twist like most of Shyamalan's other movies and that it doesn't really answer all the questions. Some theories are spread throughout the film and the movie has a strong environmental message but it's never getting too educational or pretentious. The film indirectly criticizes the media that are jumping to conclusions about terrorist attacks and toxic gases which end up influencing some tragic events in the movie. This film offers a lot of food for thought without exaggerating things and lets the viewers think by themselves.

    The acting blends in perfectly. The actors are showing emotions of care and fear but we don't get the usual stereotypes of crying and yelling people like in so many other disaster movies. I liked Mark Wahlberg's performance as goofy but resilient science teacher that perfectly complemented Zooey Deschanel's character which was rather insecure and stressful. The two characters felt charming and realistic with their genuine flaws and strengths where an optimist had to deal with a realist. The side characters weren't particularly compelling but diversified enough to keep the movie entertaining from start to finish. We get introduced to aggressive survivalists, nervous soldiers and paranoid recluses among others.

    I liked the fact that the movie didn't have any lengths. It takes less than five minutes for the introduction and the conclusion and focuses on the body of the movie. Shyamalan takes us on an epic survival journey developing a gloomy and slightly surrealist atmosphere that gives the movie a very unique mood. It neither focuses on special effects nor on a dystopian atmosphere like so many other films of its kind and opts for a mysterious approach instead.

    Overall, the acting, mood and script are compelling because they are creative, entertaining and unique. Most people criticized the movie because their expectations of a spectacular disaster movie with a surprising twist weren't met or simply because they didn't fully understand the movie and tried to interpret the origins and reasons behind the happening. As the movie mentions itself, some things cannot be explained and should just be taken the way they are. If you accept this rule and don't have any specific expectations, ''The Happening'' will surprise you positively. This movie might not be a masterpiece but it clearly is one of the most distinctive disaster films of the new millennium.

    Partager via Gmail Delicious Technorati Yahoo! Google Bookmarks Blogmarks Pin It

    votre commentaire


    Suivre le flux RSS des articles de cette rubrique
    Suivre le flux RSS des commentaires de cette rubrique