Or so...
I have noticed that my posts have been few and far between. I haven't thought to review anything of late. This is going to change.
Now I prefer to review something before anyone else, so you can take my opinions and use them to formulate your own. Because everyone is entitled to my opinion.
But I've been thinking about reviewing older movies that I have seen in awhile, i.e. Starship Troopers. Because I feel that time does something to movies.
I mean, have you watched Starship Troopers recently? Chances are the answer is no. I watched it about a week and a half ago because I saw it on the front page of Hulu and I had recently had a crazy dream that was very Troopers-like and I wanted to really compare the to. It was kinda uncanny, but I won't get too much into that.
The point is... I actually liked the campiness of this movie. When it was brand new, you watched it for pure cinematic value, which it has little. Now you watch it to see why people actually enjoyed this movie. You don't feel as jaded as you do when watching a new movie because you already know how well it did. Any controversy is so far in the past that no one cares anymore. It was very refreshing.
So look for that in a couple weeks... I gotta watch it one more time to make sure I get everything.
Other than that there really isn't any movies that I feel need my snark in review. I mean, I will probably work the Eclipse midnight, so I'll rip that to shreds, but other than that I've got nothing. So look for reviews of movies that you may have forgotten about to float across my blog. I'm hoping to have a ton of fun with this.
Fiser, OUT!
[drops mic]
25 May 2010
30 April 2010
A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010)
I don’t pretend to be a non-biased critic. I’m very biased. I often tell people that I watch movies strictly for people in them. After I get that piece over with, then I judge the movie by itself.
Nightmare is no different. I watched this movie (and actually paid $10 to see the midnight showing) purely because of Kyle Gallner. He is quite possibly the best underrated actor out there. He is just really good at his job. Of course, he often plays the same character, but that’s beside the point. Anyways, I’m in love with this man. Blame it on a combination of CSI:NY and the commentary from Haunting in Connecticut. But enough about my love for this man.
The movie itself was… okay. It was very predictable, especially after half of the cast was gone within the first 30 minutes. Oops, sorry. SPOILER ALERT….. people die in a Freddy Krueger movie. That’s kinda like saying Oceans is gonna have water.
Some of it felt like a film school project. Some of it was poorly lit… I mean when it wasn’t supposed to be poorly lit. And a lot of the acting was awful, namely the lead. I had no remorse for this new Nancy. She just kinda alienated me, and she’s the protagonist. I get that she’s a loner and being a loner means you feel for her, but I didn’t feel for her at all. Except that she was in love with Quentin (Kyle). That I totally understand.
I know everyone wants to know how Jackie Earle Haley did as Krueger. He was good. Not as good as Englund, but then again no one can be as good as Englund. Englund IS Freddy. There’s no way around it. But for a secondary choice, Haley did a really good job. He was very creepy and the burn makeup was definitely disgusting.
Some of the one-liners were awful, like Doomsday Arcade (look it up) awful. There is no excuse for a poorly written pun in a horror movie. Wait until the sequel to add in the puns. I realize that this technically is a sequel, but it also is a reimagining and that means some people are being introduced to the series for the first time. Cut the puns to a minimum the first time around.
I was happy that they included the original music. I have an album of scary movie themes, and that is one of my favorites. Right after Exorcist and right before Halloween, which is tied with Poltergeist. So including it really made my night.
So to review, it was okay. It was highly predictable. I’m a shallow person.
Fiser, OUT!
[drops mic]
Nightmare is no different. I watched this movie (and actually paid $10 to see the midnight showing) purely because of Kyle Gallner. He is quite possibly the best underrated actor out there. He is just really good at his job. Of course, he often plays the same character, but that’s beside the point. Anyways, I’m in love with this man. Blame it on a combination of CSI:NY and the commentary from Haunting in Connecticut. But enough about my love for this man.
The movie itself was… okay. It was very predictable, especially after half of the cast was gone within the first 30 minutes. Oops, sorry. SPOILER ALERT….. people die in a Freddy Krueger movie. That’s kinda like saying Oceans is gonna have water.
Some of it felt like a film school project. Some of it was poorly lit… I mean when it wasn’t supposed to be poorly lit. And a lot of the acting was awful, namely the lead. I had no remorse for this new Nancy. She just kinda alienated me, and she’s the protagonist. I get that she’s a loner and being a loner means you feel for her, but I didn’t feel for her at all. Except that she was in love with Quentin (Kyle). That I totally understand.
I know everyone wants to know how Jackie Earle Haley did as Krueger. He was good. Not as good as Englund, but then again no one can be as good as Englund. Englund IS Freddy. There’s no way around it. But for a secondary choice, Haley did a really good job. He was very creepy and the burn makeup was definitely disgusting.
Some of the one-liners were awful, like Doomsday Arcade (look it up) awful. There is no excuse for a poorly written pun in a horror movie. Wait until the sequel to add in the puns. I realize that this technically is a sequel, but it also is a reimagining and that means some people are being introduced to the series for the first time. Cut the puns to a minimum the first time around.
I was happy that they included the original music. I have an album of scary movie themes, and that is one of my favorites. Right after Exorcist and right before Halloween, which is tied with Poltergeist. So including it really made my night.
So to review, it was okay. It was highly predictable. I’m a shallow person.
Fiser, OUT!
[drops mic]
05 March 2010
“Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!”
I come to this movie with expectations, which generally is bad. I have found that if you expect a movie to be awesome, it will sorely disappoint. Take Wolfman; I really thought it could’ve been epic, but sadly it was not.
Now Alice has a great director, a stellar cast (both live action and voice), and is based around one of my all-time favorite books (okay, 2 books, but really who else knows that it’s 2 books). It’s full of Britishy type people doing Britishy type things, and I am an Anglophile. It’s set in Victorian England and has that whole vibe. It basically dares you NOT to like this film.
This is almost impossible to do.
I liked Alice. I really liked it; mainly because it talked a lot about the Jabberwock. Jabberwocky is my favorite poem. There is just something about it that is so… special. In the original Disney cartoon, they really didn’t mention the Jabberwock, with the exception of the Cheshire Cat singing the first stanza, so finding that it played a big role… well, I was excited.
Another thing I really like is the fact that a lot of the scenes came straight from the original illustrations. If you have a copy of Through the Looking-Glass, take a look of the picture that accompanies Jabberwocky. The picture is in the film, and moreso it is displayed in real-life by real actors. Well, an actor and some CGI. The tunic the rabbit wears when he is a page is straight from the book. The movie is mostly very faithful to the book. And that's rare these days.
Now, I watched the 2D version. I’m not saying that there is anything wrong with 3D, though I could only really tell it was made for 3D during the final battle, but I will always choose 2D over 3D. This is for a couple reasons. One, 3D gives me headaches, and I can’t enjoy a movie if I can’t watch the movie because it pains me to watch. There is something with the polarization and my nearsighted astigmatism that doesn’t blend. Two, at my theater 2D is still on reels, and therefore I needed to check for misframes and sound hiccups. Just a side note, if you are watching the 2D version at the Marcus Cinema in La Crosse, there is a bend in the film in the very beginning. It’s not over anything important and it only lasts a snap, but it is very noticeable. So I watched the 2D and enjoyed it very much.
It is a gorgeous movie. Maybe not Avatar gorgeous, but beautiful nonetheless. The costumes are magnificent and the casting is great. Some of the special effects bothered me, mainly the Red Queen’s head and the Knave’s legs. I know it was supposed to seem off, but it just looked wrong some of the times. I can’t really explain it more than it looked wrong.
That was another thing. In the books, the Knave is the Queen’s son. Knave = Prince and whatnot. But in the movie the Knave is kinda the Queen’s boy toy. It was kinda weird.
And while I’m on a tangent, the icky guy in the beginning that wants to marry Alice reminded me of my friend’s ex-boyfriend/current roommate. I mean he looked exactly like him, except for the red hair. That is all I wanted to say about that.
Okay, I’m running out of things to say.
To recap, the story is good. The cast and crew are good. The film is beautiful. The SFX are off-putting. And the Jabberwock is featured. Overall, I really enjoyed this movie. I know that it will do well, and deservingly so.
I don’t have a star/rating system, so be your own judge.
Ta!
Fiser, OUT!
[drops mic]
The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!”
I come to this movie with expectations, which generally is bad. I have found that if you expect a movie to be awesome, it will sorely disappoint. Take Wolfman; I really thought it could’ve been epic, but sadly it was not.
Now Alice has a great director, a stellar cast (both live action and voice), and is based around one of my all-time favorite books (okay, 2 books, but really who else knows that it’s 2 books). It’s full of Britishy type people doing Britishy type things, and I am an Anglophile. It’s set in Victorian England and has that whole vibe. It basically dares you NOT to like this film.
This is almost impossible to do.
I liked Alice. I really liked it; mainly because it talked a lot about the Jabberwock. Jabberwocky is my favorite poem. There is just something about it that is so… special. In the original Disney cartoon, they really didn’t mention the Jabberwock, with the exception of the Cheshire Cat singing the first stanza, so finding that it played a big role… well, I was excited.
Another thing I really like is the fact that a lot of the scenes came straight from the original illustrations. If you have a copy of Through the Looking-Glass, take a look of the picture that accompanies Jabberwocky. The picture is in the film, and moreso it is displayed in real-life by real actors. Well, an actor and some CGI. The tunic the rabbit wears when he is a page is straight from the book. The movie is mostly very faithful to the book. And that's rare these days.
Now, I watched the 2D version. I’m not saying that there is anything wrong with 3D, though I could only really tell it was made for 3D during the final battle, but I will always choose 2D over 3D. This is for a couple reasons. One, 3D gives me headaches, and I can’t enjoy a movie if I can’t watch the movie because it pains me to watch. There is something with the polarization and my nearsighted astigmatism that doesn’t blend. Two, at my theater 2D is still on reels, and therefore I needed to check for misframes and sound hiccups. Just a side note, if you are watching the 2D version at the Marcus Cinema in La Crosse, there is a bend in the film in the very beginning. It’s not over anything important and it only lasts a snap, but it is very noticeable. So I watched the 2D and enjoyed it very much.
It is a gorgeous movie. Maybe not Avatar gorgeous, but beautiful nonetheless. The costumes are magnificent and the casting is great. Some of the special effects bothered me, mainly the Red Queen’s head and the Knave’s legs. I know it was supposed to seem off, but it just looked wrong some of the times. I can’t really explain it more than it looked wrong.
That was another thing. In the books, the Knave is the Queen’s son. Knave = Prince and whatnot. But in the movie the Knave is kinda the Queen’s boy toy. It was kinda weird.
And while I’m on a tangent, the icky guy in the beginning that wants to marry Alice reminded me of my friend’s ex-boyfriend/current roommate. I mean he looked exactly like him, except for the red hair. That is all I wanted to say about that.
Okay, I’m running out of things to say.
To recap, the story is good. The cast and crew are good. The film is beautiful. The SFX are off-putting. And the Jabberwock is featured. Overall, I really enjoyed this movie. I know that it will do well, and deservingly so.
I don’t have a star/rating system, so be your own judge.
Ta!
Fiser, OUT!
[drops mic]
12 February 2010
awooooo...
I'd like to start by saying, "I LOVE MY JOB!!"
I just got to watch Wolfman before it's open. I was "watching for miss frames." Basically I got to watch the movie, by myself, and make sure it was put together correctly.
I love my job.
First, what exactly do I know about this movie. Well, watching it didn't really expand my mind. I wrote this next paragraph before I watched. It's pretty much spot on, with just a few tweaks.
What do I know about this movie? Well, Benicio del Toro plays Wolfie, which is quite possibly type-casting. Then again I can't really think of another movie he's been in. Hugo Weaving plays creepy inspector guy who also is a Wolfie and NO that's not a SPOILER because it was in the trailer.* It shouldn't've been there is we weren't supposed to know. Emily Blunt plays damsel... not much of a compelling role, and Sir Hopkins plays Van Helsing. Come one! I am not the only person who caught that connection.
*Weaving's character was not a Wolfie. The thing in the trailer was a creepy boy Wolfie that just happened to look like Weaving. That's just unfortunate. Sorry, but he's a creepy looking person.
Speaking of creepy looking people... EVERYONE (save Emily Blunt) in this movie is creepy looking. It's like they sent out the casting call specifically calling for creepy people. The only person they were missing was the guy that played Tracy in The Tooth Fairy.
So I laughed through the whole movie. Mainly because Jen is hilarious, but also because the movie turned out to be quite ridiculous. It could've been awesome. It could've been an awesome 3-hour movie, but I think they sent it to some hack team of editors who decided that the most important shots of the movie were moon phase montages.
They were everywhere! I know that the moon plays an important role in werewolf movies, but COME ON!! It's like nothing important ever happened the rest of the month so they just fast forwarded.
There were a lot of jump cuts to nothing. One scene had BdT and Miss Blunt sharing a moment by a waterfall. He "hears" distant horses. Cut to horses coming up the drive and he is ALREADY THERE!! How is he possibly that fast?
And that was another thing. I'm sorry, but BdT is not attractive. How did he end up as the romantic lead? I know, ugly people need love too (I know that better than most) but seriously... stick to the uggo crazy roles you're good at.
And don't get me started on hats...
I'm off topic.
I had high expectations for this movie. I need to learn to never have high expectations for a movie. They always let me down. This could've been epic, like Dracula. Okay, so Dracula wasn't a perfect movie, but I at least thought it was brilliantly made. This could've been epic, but in the end it was not.
So should you watch it? Well... I'm not one to tell people that they need to see a movie. Unless it's Ironman. Go see Ironman. This movie... watch it if you've exhausted all choices except Valentine's Day. Definitely watch this before that puke-fest of a movie.
I just got to watch Wolfman before it's open. I was "watching for miss frames." Basically I got to watch the movie, by myself, and make sure it was put together correctly.
I love my job.
First, what exactly do I know about this movie. Well, watching it didn't really expand my mind. I wrote this next paragraph before I watched. It's pretty much spot on, with just a few tweaks.
What do I know about this movie? Well, Benicio del Toro plays Wolfie, which is quite possibly type-casting. Then again I can't really think of another movie he's been in. Hugo Weaving plays creepy inspector guy who also is a Wolfie and NO that's not a SPOILER because it was in the trailer.* It shouldn't've been there is we weren't supposed to know. Emily Blunt plays damsel... not much of a compelling role, and Sir Hopkins plays Van Helsing. Come one! I am not the only person who caught that connection.
*Weaving's character was not a Wolfie. The thing in the trailer was a creepy boy Wolfie that just happened to look like Weaving. That's just unfortunate. Sorry, but he's a creepy looking person.
Speaking of creepy looking people... EVERYONE (save Emily Blunt) in this movie is creepy looking. It's like they sent out the casting call specifically calling for creepy people. The only person they were missing was the guy that played Tracy in The Tooth Fairy.
So I laughed through the whole movie. Mainly because Jen is hilarious, but also because the movie turned out to be quite ridiculous. It could've been awesome. It could've been an awesome 3-hour movie, but I think they sent it to some hack team of editors who decided that the most important shots of the movie were moon phase montages.
They were everywhere! I know that the moon plays an important role in werewolf movies, but COME ON!! It's like nothing important ever happened the rest of the month so they just fast forwarded.
There were a lot of jump cuts to nothing. One scene had BdT and Miss Blunt sharing a moment by a waterfall. He "hears" distant horses. Cut to horses coming up the drive and he is ALREADY THERE!! How is he possibly that fast?
And that was another thing. I'm sorry, but BdT is not attractive. How did he end up as the romantic lead? I know, ugly people need love too (I know that better than most) but seriously... stick to the uggo crazy roles you're good at.
And don't get me started on hats...
I'm off topic.
I had high expectations for this movie. I need to learn to never have high expectations for a movie. They always let me down. This could've been epic, like Dracula. Okay, so Dracula wasn't a perfect movie, but I at least thought it was brilliantly made. This could've been epic, but in the end it was not.
So should you watch it? Well... I'm not one to tell people that they need to see a movie. Unless it's Ironman. Go see Ironman. This movie... watch it if you've exhausted all choices except Valentine's Day. Definitely watch this before that puke-fest of a movie.
01 February 2010
very mindless...
Some days I just like to sit on the computer and think about what might have been. Oh, big SPOILER alert. This post may end up on the depressing side.
I have had so many people tell me just how much potential they see in me. They tell me that I'm very creative and so full of ideas and so wonderful for being so full of ideas. They tell me that they hate seeing me not do anything with my life because I do have so much potential. I would like to agree with them that I do, but for some reason I don't agree.
If I had so much potential, then why am I living like I am? Why am I not famous yet because they way people paint me, I should be doing something with me life. Instead I'm living with my sister, failing to pay bills, and working 2 part time jobs; one of which I hate. I shouldn't be living like this if I have so much potential.
Tell me I'm wrong.
My biggest problem is me. I have no drive. I really wish there was something in my life I would do anything for. I don't have that. Honestly, I remember in school (now I'm talking way back in high school and middle school even) whenever we were told to "imagine yourself in 10 years" I had nothing. I couldn't do it. "Imagine yourself in 10 years..." I would be 10 years older, and .... that's about as far as I got.
Why am I thinking about this right now? I'll tell you. I just watched the series finale of Dollhouse. It really doesn't have any correlation, but it kinda does. The reason is that Joss Whedon is like my hero. It's safe to say that. He writes like I do, at least I like to think that I write like him. His shows speak to me in a way that no other show has, and it's because the things the people say are things that I would say. His characters, albeit much more detailed, are like characters I would think up. Though I am a bit more on the morbid side. Then again, he has one foot firmly in the morbid side.
Anyways, I have today off of work, and I had goals that I set out to do. Am I going to do them? It's up in the air.
I've lost my train of thought.
[Fiser, OUT!]
I have had so many people tell me just how much potential they see in me. They tell me that I'm very creative and so full of ideas and so wonderful for being so full of ideas. They tell me that they hate seeing me not do anything with my life because I do have so much potential. I would like to agree with them that I do, but for some reason I don't agree.
If I had so much potential, then why am I living like I am? Why am I not famous yet because they way people paint me, I should be doing something with me life. Instead I'm living with my sister, failing to pay bills, and working 2 part time jobs; one of which I hate. I shouldn't be living like this if I have so much potential.
Tell me I'm wrong.
My biggest problem is me. I have no drive. I really wish there was something in my life I would do anything for. I don't have that. Honestly, I remember in school (now I'm talking way back in high school and middle school even) whenever we were told to "imagine yourself in 10 years" I had nothing. I couldn't do it. "Imagine yourself in 10 years..." I would be 10 years older, and .... that's about as far as I got.
Why am I thinking about this right now? I'll tell you. I just watched the series finale of Dollhouse. It really doesn't have any correlation, but it kinda does. The reason is that Joss Whedon is like my hero. It's safe to say that. He writes like I do, at least I like to think that I write like him. His shows speak to me in a way that no other show has, and it's because the things the people say are things that I would say. His characters, albeit much more detailed, are like characters I would think up. Though I am a bit more on the morbid side. Then again, he has one foot firmly in the morbid side.
Anyways, I have today off of work, and I had goals that I set out to do. Am I going to do them? It's up in the air.
I've lost my train of thought.
[Fiser, OUT!]
18 December 2009
CGI porn... I've really gotta stop naming these as porn
Well I was going to begin this review by saying that I had just seen a pretty good remake of FernGully: The Last Rainforest, but apparently I’m months behind on that comparison. I do want to say that if FernGully had Cameron’s budget, we wouldn’t have to worry about losing the rainforests anymore.
I just saw Avatar, which is James Cameron’s latest opus and not the live action version of one of the best Nickelodeon cartoons in recent years. (So can’t wait for that movie next year.) It was good… not the best movie I’ve seen this year, but good none the less.
A CGI enthusiast’s wet dream, Avatar is 60% photo-realistic CGI work and motion capture. 60%! 60! I spent a half hour trying to make a CGI banana that looked semi-banana-ish. I can’t fathom how many man hours it took to accomplish a 2 hour and 42 minutes movie that is 60% CGI. My mind just exploded.
I may want to include some plot into my review, but really who needs plot with a movie this pretty. James Cameron, that’s who! If there is one thing this man can do it is write a good story. Yes, it parallels FernGully, but it’s still a good story.
Jake Sully is an ex-Marine (but is anyone really an EX-Marine?) whose twin brother just died. They don’t really explain how, he just does. He was a scientist who had been studying for years just to link with his avatar to study the Na’Vi up close and personal. Since all this money has already gone into growing a fully formed human-Na’Vi avatar, they figure that one twin is just as good as the other.
One thing to mention, and unless you’ve been living under a rock you already know this, but Jake is in a wheelchair. Through some accident that isn’t really explained, he has been left dead from the waist down. So when he’s linked to his avatar, he fully regained the use of his lower extremities. So there’s a very endearing scene when he first tries his new legs.
So Jake masterfully infiltrates the Na’Vi…
Sorry, I couldn’t help myself.
Through a very lengthy chase sequence (which was made all that much worse by the lack of focus I had in the theater) he is “captured” by Neytiri, the daughter of the king of one of the many tribes of Na’Vi. She brings him back, though she really doesn’t want to, and then is forced to teach him the ways of the world.
And that’s all I’m gonna say about the story. If you want more, then go see the movie. I’m not for spoilers. Well… I am, but I’m not gonna be the one to tell you.
I did enjoy the movie, especially once they cleaned up the focus, and I would recommend it. It does strike chords of other movies, but seriously when one the last time you’ve seen anything original in the theaters? It’s kinda long, but it paces well.
I don’t have a rating system. I may need to think one up. In the meantime, I say that you should see it, especially if you like CGI work. It’s got some damn good CGI.
Fiser, OUT!
I just saw Avatar, which is James Cameron’s latest opus and not the live action version of one of the best Nickelodeon cartoons in recent years. (So can’t wait for that movie next year.) It was good… not the best movie I’ve seen this year, but good none the less.
A CGI enthusiast’s wet dream, Avatar is 60% photo-realistic CGI work and motion capture. 60%! 60! I spent a half hour trying to make a CGI banana that looked semi-banana-ish. I can’t fathom how many man hours it took to accomplish a 2 hour and 42 minutes movie that is 60% CGI. My mind just exploded.
I may want to include some plot into my review, but really who needs plot with a movie this pretty. James Cameron, that’s who! If there is one thing this man can do it is write a good story. Yes, it parallels FernGully, but it’s still a good story.
Jake Sully is an ex-Marine (but is anyone really an EX-Marine?) whose twin brother just died. They don’t really explain how, he just does. He was a scientist who had been studying for years just to link with his avatar to study the Na’Vi up close and personal. Since all this money has already gone into growing a fully formed human-Na’Vi avatar, they figure that one twin is just as good as the other.
One thing to mention, and unless you’ve been living under a rock you already know this, but Jake is in a wheelchair. Through some accident that isn’t really explained, he has been left dead from the waist down. So when he’s linked to his avatar, he fully regained the use of his lower extremities. So there’s a very endearing scene when he first tries his new legs.
So Jake masterfully infiltrates the Na’Vi…
Sorry, I couldn’t help myself.
Through a very lengthy chase sequence (which was made all that much worse by the lack of focus I had in the theater) he is “captured” by Neytiri, the daughter of the king of one of the many tribes of Na’Vi. She brings him back, though she really doesn’t want to, and then is forced to teach him the ways of the world.
And that’s all I’m gonna say about the story. If you want more, then go see the movie. I’m not for spoilers. Well… I am, but I’m not gonna be the one to tell you.
I did enjoy the movie, especially once they cleaned up the focus, and I would recommend it. It does strike chords of other movies, but seriously when one the last time you’ve seen anything original in the theaters? It’s kinda long, but it paces well.
I don’t have a rating system. I may need to think one up. In the meantime, I say that you should see it, especially if you like CGI work. It’s got some damn good CGI.
Fiser, OUT!
13 November 2009
disaster porn...
... or why I love disaster movies....
I just saw the majority of 2012. I say majority because I missed the last half hour as we were all taking turns watching the reels so they don't brain wrap. If you understood that, congratulations! you probably work as a projectionist or did at one point.
Why I was voted the reel keeper for the very last portion of the movie is beyond me. It could be because I was sitting by myself all peaceful-like and they couldn't stand it. But most likely it was because I am over 18.
Back to my review...
I love disaster movies. I don't know what it is about them... the big budgets... the even bigger CG special effects... the obvious blue/green screen effects... but whatever it is, I love them. 2012 is no exception. It reeled me in to the point that I actually cared about the one-off character who, when introduced, you knew was gonna die, but you kept rooting for them anyways. (Oh, Sasha, you were hot and Russian. My two favorite qualities in a hot Russian.)
This movie had a lot of aspects of other disaster movies in it. One could safely say that it was like almost all major disaster flicks rolled into one. You had some Poseidon mixed with Titanic (which is very redundant) mix in some Perfect Storm and 10.5 (yes, I watch the SciFi... 'scuse me, SyFy movies) then sprinkle on top some Day After Tomorrow only flip it.
I would have to say that this movie is very much like Day After Tomorrow, only instead of a new Ice Age you have extreme global warming. In fact, it seems that the harmless neutrinos released from solar flares are actually cooking the Earth from the inside out. Just like a microwave, and that analogy is straight from the movie. (Which is surprising to think that I could actually come up with a line from the beginning of a 3 HOUR movie.)
I must pause here for a second and mourn. I just read on Wikipedia (I know, a very reputable news source) that there is plans to make a TV series based on the lives of the survivors. I smell bad idea.
I was searching for something but I know can't remember what it was.
Hmmm....
Oh yeah, at one point in the story the land masses shift as well as the poles. This puts the South Pole smack dab in the middle of Wisconsin.
So, yeah, looks like another normal winter for Wisconsin in 2012.
Yay, Wisconsin jokes!!
I'm totally off track. I liked the movie. I don't want to spoil anything... Not that I could having not seen the last 30 minutes. But I do want to not spoil the things I did see.
It's a disaster movie.
It's not for everyone.
I enjoyed it a lot.
Sasha is a hot Russian.
Yup, that pretty much sums it up.
Laters,
Erin
I just saw the majority of 2012. I say majority because I missed the last half hour as we were all taking turns watching the reels so they don't brain wrap. If you understood that, congratulations! you probably work as a projectionist or did at one point.
Why I was voted the reel keeper for the very last portion of the movie is beyond me. It could be because I was sitting by myself all peaceful-like and they couldn't stand it. But most likely it was because I am over 18.
Back to my review...
I love disaster movies. I don't know what it is about them... the big budgets... the even bigger CG special effects... the obvious blue/green screen effects... but whatever it is, I love them. 2012 is no exception. It reeled me in to the point that I actually cared about the one-off character who, when introduced, you knew was gonna die, but you kept rooting for them anyways. (Oh, Sasha, you were hot and Russian. My two favorite qualities in a hot Russian.)
This movie had a lot of aspects of other disaster movies in it. One could safely say that it was like almost all major disaster flicks rolled into one. You had some Poseidon mixed with Titanic (which is very redundant) mix in some Perfect Storm and 10.5 (yes, I watch the SciFi... 'scuse me, SyFy movies) then sprinkle on top some Day After Tomorrow only flip it.
I would have to say that this movie is very much like Day After Tomorrow, only instead of a new Ice Age you have extreme global warming. In fact, it seems that the harmless neutrinos released from solar flares are actually cooking the Earth from the inside out. Just like a microwave, and that analogy is straight from the movie. (Which is surprising to think that I could actually come up with a line from the beginning of a 3 HOUR movie.)
I must pause here for a second and mourn. I just read on Wikipedia (I know, a very reputable news source) that there is plans to make a TV series based on the lives of the survivors. I smell bad idea.
I was searching for something but I know can't remember what it was.
Hmmm....
Oh yeah, at one point in the story the land masses shift as well as the poles. This puts the South Pole smack dab in the middle of Wisconsin.
So, yeah, looks like another normal winter for Wisconsin in 2012.
Yay, Wisconsin jokes!!
I'm totally off track. I liked the movie. I don't want to spoil anything... Not that I could having not seen the last 30 minutes. But I do want to not spoil the things I did see.
It's a disaster movie.
It's not for everyone.
I enjoyed it a lot.
Sasha is a hot Russian.
Yup, that pretty much sums it up.
Laters,
Erin
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)