I am both surprised and delighted that this is not only the best superhero movie to date, (even eclipsing Spider-Man 2), but currently the best movie I've seen this year.
This is one lousy film. Redford gives a non-performance as some guy lost at sea. Why is he there? Who is he? Why should we care if he lives or dies? Where is he trying to go? The film is very undeveloped and amateurish... we are not told any of these things. Redford's "character" is obviously in trouble and in one scene after another, he is more deeply in trouble, but the ONLY thing we are given to focus on are the arbitrary catastrophies Redford faces, and these quickly begin to feel repetitious. I say,skip this stinker, and ignore the pretentious critics who liked it.
I halfway agree with you. Last Action Hero was by no means the disaster many made it out to be; the Razzie voters were as usual grandstanding and taking the easy way out. In fact, I wouldn't rate it any lower than True Lies, Commando, Eraser or some of the other successful Schwarzenegger films. If I remember correctly, the studio's big mistake was releasing it around the same time as some Spielberg flick involving dinosaurs. Oops!
I Just wanted to point that out. I never really liked Twins but love Last Action Hero. I loved how it made fun of itself and the Action genre. And all the inside jokes. I always felt like it was really underrated.
Thanks for the correction, Roaches. Since neither movie was particularly worth seeing again after the initial viewings roughly two-and-a-half decades ago, my memory doubtless is faulty on this.
Matt, you're wrong about something. In Last Action Hero he walks into Blockbuster video and see's A cardboard stand-up of Stallone as the Terminator in T2 :Judgement Day. It was in the movie Twins in what you were talking about in your review. I can't believe you got that wrong.
^ How so? I usually go to Concord Mills for IMAX movies, and it is as good as I've ever seen.
Down the road, it will hold up just fine on my flat screen TVs. They are 3D.
I would love to see it in 3D Imax, but what passes for Imax here in Charlotte, isn't really.
I think that dream sequice kinda rings true. After all it was her dream she was having not the film makers.
Holy cow. This review is one of the most insightful, referenced, expertly contrasted and written I've ever read. A piece of art in and of itself.
Just saw this movie this morning, and I'm still smiling. I disagree with your review wholeheartedly, especially the part where you write that the movie could have been called Alcottland or Shakespeareland. You really couldn't be more wrong, and I think it demonstrates that your review suffers from a degree of ignorance of Austen's work. Seeing the storyline of Pride and Prejudice echoed in multiple (and clever) ways was fun, entertaining and satisfying. And Jennifer Coolidge was brilliant.
Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. What movie were you watching. This movie is so completely Austeneaque in every way! The plot line is exactly the same as any Austen novel. The casting is perfect, and the belly laughs are plentiful. From the moment I saw Jane Seymour clutching that stuffed lamb, I know I was in for a treat. Austen novels are more fun and playful than stuffy English teachers and movie critics give them credit for. I love Mr. Darcy, and I love this film!!
My bad; corrected. Thanks for the catch!
Just fyi, you wrote Sutton instead of Sutter a few times in the post.
A "prez dispenser" -- love it, Matt!
I would like to believe that this final script could not have been what Blomkamp started with. There must have been some major editing; the movie felt hollow - a shadow of the movie I thought I was going to see. I could rant for a while about how ridiculous parts / characters/actors were in my estimation (ie: Jodie Foster's on-again off-again "French" accent, Damon's character being so clueless, no explanation of why everyone in Elysium had a facial tattoo of sorts etc.... )Too bad. It could have been a great film - if it wasn't so aimless.
I agree with this review totally. The Conjuring is just well-made but apart from that it's the same old formula stuff you see in all horror films. Come on - can we get out of the haunted house and scary little girls tricks for once!
this guy has no idea what he is talking about, we should expect more from our horror films? what do purpose we should get. this movie is the scariest best done horror movie have seen since Poltergeist. Yes, it is not a new take on the haunted house theme, but it does better than any in recent memory. It does old school style, setting mood, generating real scares not gross out scenes. the fact that you can sit their and say it was not a good horror film proves one thing the fact you have not seen many. i have spent most of my life watching scary movies, i have seen thousands of them, i own over a thousand horror films. this is one of the best, you mention the The Decent, i was not impressed it was okay, but nothing to write home about. it was a better version of The Cave. This is a movie that makes squirm, makes you curse under your breath, sends shivers down your spine. That is what i want and something had been missing for a while. it is something i got with the Conjuring. we do expect more and we got it with this movie.
Aw Matt, I'm disappointed you didn't like it. I'm going to disagree that this movie has much to do with Emmerich or Bay as Del Toro clearly has a lot more sympathy for property damage than those two. There wasn't really a moment where someone walks by another person getting obliterated without batting an eye. There's a real sense of the effects of these fights on this world and some sympathy for the plight of people living under these conditions. I thought the actions in this movie had genuine consequences, which really don't happen in Bay or Emmerich's films.
Also I disagree with you that this doesn't fit in visually with Del Toro's previous work. Sure, this is a big budget Hollywood movie but it's also the grungiest looking big budget Hollywood movie I've seen in ages. Instead of creating giant robots and a base that was design by Apple, we have robots that look like they've been used repeatedly and a base that has certainly seen better days. Del Toro has a real affinity for world building in his films and while I can agreed it's a little subdued in this film, it's still on display. I doubt any other director would have had an entire section of a city built out of the carcass of a dead monster let alone actually make a set of it. Also I am 90% certain that if Del Toro didn't have a hand in this script, there probably wouldn't have been a black market for Kaiju body parts which I think is a very Del Toro thing. Also this film clearly had a color palette and honest to god cinematography which I don't think I've ever seen in a Bay or Emmerich film. It's a subdued aesthetic but it's definitely a Del Toro aesthetic firmly on display in this movie.
Is this my favorite Del Toro movie? Not by a longshot. Still I think there's enough of him in this film that it elevates it past standard blockbuster fare.
Lone Ranger was not a fool but this movie was
Powered by Foundation