Take a tip from me if you like the indi movies so far. My tip is buy the extra large popcorn, sit back, and enjoy. Yes be prepared to be blown away with action-packed scenes and super duper high tech as Indi falls to great depths and meets a new side kick. His son? maybe. Just find out!
Old Harrison does us proud at his fine age. He's still got it? ooh yes. some may say its cheesie and unbelievable. No. No way is it cheesie. It's unbelievable? Yup but hey be honest what else is indi for?
I saw Indiana Jones last night and walked out of the theater totally bummed! This was a stupid movie. I realize that the Indiana Jones movies have over-the-top moments, but at least in the first three, the impossible was made to look believable. This one was like a cartoon. I was actually bored. There were unexplained scenes that left you wondering, "What was that all about?", and the ending was terrible...aliens??? This movie was a fantasy/science fiction flick...not an adventure movie. Fantasy is fine if you know that's what you're going to see, but don't sell it as adventure. This gets one star just because I like Harrison Ford.
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull Started out fine and is a good movie to see if you have nothing else to do, The problem with the movie is the story line compared to the last 3 movies was dull and obvious.
There were also sequences in the movie that made a peron go Duh, snake as a rope, fridge protecting you against a nuclear explosion, surviving a niagra fall like fall 3 times and have the boat only get destroyed on the last fall and everyone survives????
Though it was entertaining, and hey thats what we want right, atleast make the movie believable.
As far as im concerned the movie had alot of hype but in the end it may make george and stephen alot of money but its the black sheep of the 4 films.
The beautiful story begins with Cleveland Heep finds a girl swimming in the water pool of the building during the night. Accidentally he slides bumps his head onto floor and falls in a faint right through. The girl rescues him tells him her name is Story, and she is a Ã¢â‚¬Å“NarfÃ¢â‚¬Â character of bedtime stories. First, I donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t know she is from the past when I see the movie scenario. She comes out with no warning, surprises every one. Suddenly, something is onto her, chases after.
The past must be scary to her new world. Thanks fully, may god in heaven. The entire guess points me to this new direction, this world, in which heaven may be set boundary. The plot has attracts me in the drift.
The story is also bedtime story contained two kinds of people. One live under the water and one lives above it. How those two survive like themselves? Good idealism. Is there a doorway between their inhabitants? I have point at something plot isnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t clear. Writer/director is fool toward the context of it all. I believe his frantic Ã¢â‚¬Å“Six Sense,Ã¢â‚¬Â is a joke. Having never seen movie Ã¢â‚¬Å“Unbreakable,Ã¢â‚¬Â never being a fan, I have always focused on his twisted outgoing direction and his intensity. He is M. Night Shyamalan. His two other movies, Ã¢â‚¬Å“SignsÃ¢â‚¬Â and Ã¢â‚¬Å“The Village,Ã¢â‚¬Â have similar plots.
Why does movie, Ã¢â‚¬Å“Lady in the Water,Ã¢â‚¬Â attract me is that story has magic. The lady is stranger, is really nymph, known as Ã¢â‚¬Å“narfÃ¢â‚¬Â being live under the water in lengthy period. She is some character I havenÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t seen in years. Director Shyamalan makes it unusual to judge the quality. I feel lack of sympathy for him and the production. If her character can somehow change a bit, it will interest audience more. So that, I like other directors try to make productive at least, I donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t like Shyamalan. It is as I see dead people in a six sense. Exactly, it is opposite what Shyamalan wants to reveal. Now, it is spoiler, Ã¢â‚¬Å“one who chases after narf is the scrunt - is the wolf.Ã¢â‚¬Â
The Lady must floods back to her original Blue World. Is she okay with her intrusion to world above water? Now she must forget her fool rush in. Her chronic home Blue World, which means hue is not color is very silly. It stays bored in a like world, being not all above her, which suggest her homesick is reason live on another world.
I hope that I can have child beside me, tell story to her that movie suck the way it sucks. Director has gift, however, he is only one hit wonder. Like the choices, I have to be clear that his movies are very pro America, and pro Hollywood. Consider its originality, he always within circle, try to make his breakthrough.
I like Ã¢â‚¬Å“Lady in the Water,Ã¢â‚¬Â being his transition. The movie stirs me a bit, for example, when I grind banana split ice cream then I eat it, I find the ingredient that makes it likable. The movie like that, not only plot needs to fix, but also characters show childish.
By now you pretty much know what to expect when you go to see an Al Pacino movie. You wait for those moments when his eyes bug out and he starts to scream for no apparent reason. This has become a Pacino trademark, and he is often criticized for it. His acting style has become somewhat of a joke to many critics but you know what? I love it. Pacino is now a screen legend, an acting icon, and his outlandish emoting befits his stature. The problem with 88 Minutes, the new psychological thriller directed by Jon Avnet, is that there just isnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t enough of that explosive Pacino to keep us interested.
In a dreary, rainy Seattle, Pacino plays Jack Gramm, a well-known forensic psychiatrist and professor at a local college. Prosecutors often use his professional opinion to help convict criminals, and nine years ago his testimony led to the conviction of Jon Forster (Neil McDonough), believed to be the notorious Ã¢â‚¬Å“Seattle Slayer.Ã¢â‚¬Â On the eve of ForsterÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s execution, a woman Gramm knows is found murdered in the same brutal fashion as the SlayerÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s previous victims. Suddenly ForsterÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s guilt and GrammÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s motives are thrown into doubt. Was this killing done by a copycat? Or did Gramm help to put away an innocent man?
As if this wasnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t bad enough news for Gramm, he also gets a call on his cell phone informing him that he has eighty-eight minutes to live. The movie from that point on, I assume, plays out in real time, although I didnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t have a stopwatch on it. Gramm must now try to uncover who the killer is before his time is up. Why exactly 88 minutes? That answer is revealed at one point in the story, although I presume itÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s mostly so that the action can fit neatly within the running time of the movie.
The plot is standard boilerplate thriller. Everyone seems suspicious to Gramm, including his pretty T.A. (Alicia Witt) and an argumentative student (The O.C.Ã¢â‚¬â„¢s Benjamin McKenzie, in an underwritten role). As more pieces of the puzzle are revealed, even Gramm himself starts to look like a suspect. What I donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t understand is, why is this mystery person going through the effort of framing Gramm, if he/she just plans on killing him in eighty-eight minutes anyway?? And while weÃ¢â‚¬â„¢re at it, why is Gramm trying to solve this case himself, instead of calling the police? The script throws characters and plot twists at the audience in an attempt to keep us guessing, but by the end we really donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t care. Take your pick of which character you think is the culprit, and you have a good chance of being right.
Al Pacino is one of those actors, along with Edward Norton and Daniel Day-Lewis, who is always good, even if the material is not. When one of these guys is on screen I am always mesmerized by his performance. But Pacino, who is in virtually every scene in the movie, cannot lift this movie above its standard serial killer conventions. ItÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s tough to evoke dramatic tension out of countless cell phone conversations. All I kept thinking about was how fabulously coiffed his hair was. Neil McDonough isnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t given much to do as the alleged killer except rant and rave in a TV interview. 88 Minutes is rated R, although it was barely more graphic or gratuitous than an episode of say, Criminal Minds.
This movie was not good. It had real good beginning, and throughout the movie was pretty good, until the end. You want to know that the last people, who left, are going to live. But instead, the man kills the old woman and man, another woman, and his own son, to save them from being killed by the big monster. After he does all this, the marines and army come in to save them. I did not like the ending.
In 1999, the Blair Witch Project hit us with it's 16mm documentary type footage. Since then, many other films have used the tactic of amateur videography to help display graphic events in a film. CLOVERFIELD is obviously influenced by the aforementioned BWP's "run-and-gun-style filming" to tell it's tale. The tale of young upwardly mobile New Yorkers who witness the devastating destruction of their city by a gigantic, mysterious monster. This attack interrupts a going away party for the lead character, who was to be taking a job promotion in Japan. His best friend had been assigned the duty of recording the party for posterity. He ends up as the de-facto videographer of the horror caused by the villianous creature, and finally, the creature itself. CLOVERFIELD was the name given to the area formerly known as Central Park, where the video tape was found by the military some time later.
CLOVERFIELD the movie is visually stunning. The action sequences are terrific, the monster is terrifying, and the outlook is grim indeed. What a shame then, that the movie is undermined by one of the most elementary considerations in filmdom. It doesn't properly explain who some of these characters are. No one should be expected to do "Homework" on the internet to know and understand a character.
The party scene is long and chaotic, and when it spills on to the street, most of them are never seen again. Obviously there's the hero and the girl he loves. There's a loyal best friend, and a brother. The audience is left confused and unsure of anyone else's motives. CLOVERFIELD loses at least 2 stars from what COULD HAVE BEEN a legendary
sci-fi horror film.
Horton Hears a Who! is the newest movie from Blue Sky, the creators of Ice Age. It's based on the book by Dr. Suess. Long story short, Horton hears a voice on a speck and learns that a city of Whos is on it. Horton then takes the responsibility to find a safe place to place the speck, so the Whos can live in peace. But almost every animal in the jungle Nool is determined to destroy that speck, which perches on a clover flower to keep safe, because Sour Kangeroo convinces them Horton is teaching the children that there are small people.
I'll begin by saying this is a positively positive review. Let me continue and explain why. First off, this movie is hilarious. But what would you expect from the people that brought you Ice Age? It has a variety of different brands of humor. Like random (that would be the character Katie, like her line "in my world, everybody's a pony, and they all eat rainbows, and poop butterflies!"), and slapstick humor. Lots of it. It's flowing at you non-stop. And when they sing "Can't Fight this Feeling" at the end, I was almost in tears. It's oddly beautiful. Second reason, the imagery is absolutely beautiful. Everything is colorful, vivid and detailed. You can tell they put a lot of work into each character. Because this movie's animated, Dr. Suess's world comes to life. The zany crooked looking trees and houses. Everything is just like the books. Third reason this movie is so fun, the characters. Every single character has a unique personality, and you fall in love with them when you first hear them speak. I don't know how they do it.
So go see this movie if you have a good sense of humor. I'd actually say it's the funniest animated movie I've ever seen. It's very enjoyable.
*** Quotable Quotes:
Su-Chin: I'm having a little trouble concentrating.
Juno: Oh well I could sell you some of my Adderall if you want.
Su-Chin: No thanks I'm off pills.
Juno: That's a wise choice because I knew this girl who like had this crazy freak out because she took too many behavioral meds at once and she like ripped off her clothes, and dove into the fountain at Ridgedale Mall and was like, "Blah I am a Kracken from the sea!"
Su-Chin: I heard that was you.
Juno: Yeah, I'm a legend. You know, they call me the cautionary whale.
Juno: You should've gone to China, you know, 'cause I hear they give away babies like free iPods. You know, they pretty much just put them in those t-shirt guns and shoot them out at sporting events.
Bren: When you move out I'm getting two Weimaraners!
Juno: Whoa, dream big!
***At a glance:
Diablo CodyÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s quirky Oscar-winning screenplay about teen pregnancy is skillfully brought to the screen by director Jason Reitman and a talented cast, headed by the unique Ellen Page.
Juno (Ellen Page) is sixteen and her moment of passion with Paul (Michael Cera), a boy she doesnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t even know she is in love with, ends with a pregnancy. Unable to go through with her initial decision to have an abortion, she opts for pregnancy, finding a picture-perfect childless couple (Jennifer Garner and Jason Bateman). Director Jason Reitman, coming off the success of Thank You For Smoking, follows it up with his deft understated comedic touch. Page is a standout, showing real talent and a looseness in body and voice that shows sheÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ll be able to play a variety of roles. The script divides good lines among the cast, which is rounded out by Allison Janney and J.K. Simmons. Cera is my personal favorite, portraying the sensitive, intelligent, soft-spoken, unsure nerd character he brought to comic life in the Arrested Development series. Deservedly, Diablo Cody won the 2008 Oscar for Best Original Screenplay.
***Other reviewers said:
"Juno...is smart, witty, and engaging -- three ingredients that, when applied to any film, comprise a recipe for success."
- James Berardinelli (ReelViews)
"That essence of pugnacious energy that is Ellen Page has just taken another solid step toward certain stardom."
- Jules Brenner (Cinema Signals)