June 17, 2021
10 Cloverfield Lane (2016) is the epitome of a psychological thriller. Although, it is safe to say that it begins better than it ends. The P...
10 Cloverfield Lane (2016) is the epitome of a psychological thriller. Although, it is safe to say that it begins better than it ends.
The Plot: A woman is trapped in an underground bunker, where two men also reside, who tell her that an outside event has left the world unlivable.
The Good: The movie not only permits the audience to relate to what's happening with the characters on screen. But also allows us to predict what would be the outcome of each individual's decision. 10 Cloverfield Lane is written smartly and the direction by first-timer Dan Trachtenberg complements that creativity.
Mary Elizabeth Winstead delivers in the lead role
At one point, I was so intrigued by what was happening in the bunker itself that I forget the flick included an exterior setting. The cinematography is not too dark and that makes us adjust our eyes to both to the cast's expressions and the props set up in the bunker shots.
The paramount aspect of this shocker is the character development. All three figures are completely distinct in personality from each other. And that's what makes their every decision even more enticing to witness.
The equilibrium of characterization and drama with an emphasis on shock value renders it one of the most unique ventures in its respective genre. The performances are also memorable. With John Goodman leading the talent with his spectacular portrayal of Howard. John Gallagher Jr. was also convincing while Mary Elizabeth Winstead had both the flair and the looks that qualified her at the top of the billing list.
The Bad: 10 Cloverfield Lane might be a perfect example of a thriller but it's still a tad far from perfection. The ending is anti-climatic and after finishing the feature you'll be thinking of several contrasting ways in which it could have concluded.
Also, the last 20 minutes were not as entertaining as the hair-raising initial hour. This exhibition finished at a low note leaving a minority of plot-holes unexplained.
The Verdict: If you ignore the ending, albeit fancy it, then it's your own personal choice. In my opinion, 10 Cloverfield Lane still manages to be indelible, and that is more than what similarly-themed pictures offer nowadays in Hollywood.
The Rating: 3 out of 4.
June 17, 2021
Pawn Sacrifice (2015) tries to showcase an idea which is beyond the cinematography itself. It's acted and directed well but the writing ...
Pawn Sacrifice (2015) tries to showcase an idea which is beyond the cinematography itself. It's acted and directed well but the writing did not live up to what film-maker Edward Zwick wanted to achieve.
The Plot: It's based on the true events which led up to the 1972 World Chess Championship between American player Bobby Fischer (Tobey Maguire) and the Russian, Boris Spassky (Liev Schreiber).
The Good: The performances, primarily that of lead actor Tobey Maguire, are brilliant. The supporting cast includes the likes of Liev Schreiber, Peter Sarsgaard, Lily Rabe, Robin Weigert and Michael Stuhlbarg. If I had to choose the second-best act that would be Schreiber's portrayal of Spassky, especially due his physical persona. Maguire's individual was anti-social whereas Schreiber's was confident. So, the director did a fantastic job of setting the stage for a cinematic contest between two characters who couldn't be more diverse.
The usage of real-life footage was also an excellent addition into the duration. At a running time of 115 minutes, it never does get too tedious for us to watch. The chess-playing sequences were shot quite well though I felt if the game was a bit more elaborated on then it would be easier for viewers to associate with what's occurring on the screen.
The best aspect of Pawn Sacrifice is the tension created when Fischer and Spassky face each other. Not only can you relate to what's happening in the flick but you can actually feel the tension the worldwide audiences must've faced during the actual Championship.
The Bad: This feature fails tremendously due to the screenplay, and this is particularly in relation to there being no fixed objective for the narrative. Is the venture about the players, or is it about the Cold War ideology playing in the background? That is what screenwriter Steven Knight got wrong.
Another negative factor is that in many factual-based films we seem to be mesmerized by what the main figure is going through, or what obstacle they are facing. Here, Maguire gives the display of a lifetime, but is hindered by Fischer's on-screen treatment. Now, it's 2016 and if we were to be impressed by the past, we need a storyline which would seem renewed for this century. This one simply fails where its contemporaries have succeeded and that is achieving an equilibrium of honest storytelling and fictional depictions.
The Verdict: Edward Zwick has the directorial credits of The Last Samurai (2003) and Blood Diamond (2006), and even though this was not an action exhibition, Pawn Sacrifice did not match his criteria due to the script's mediocrity. It's more of an enjoyable watch if you're a fan of Tobey Maguire but for me it was complete time-pass.
The Rating: 2.5 out of 4.
June 17, 2021
Lion could serve as a spiritual successor to 2008's Slumdog Millionaire, it also surpasses that flick in every area possible. The param...
Lion could serve as a spiritual successor to 2008's Slumdog Millionaire, it also surpasses that flick in every area possible. The paramount part is the acting which is perfectly presented by an ensemble cast, especially by newcomer Sunny Pawar. Him, Abhishek Bharate (Guddu), Dev Patel and Nicole Kidman brightly outshine the other thespians.
What deterred the road to perfection for Lion was its super slow-paced initial hour. The pace really kicks in after the first half, and it all goes uphill from there. One of the finest drama flicks of this decade. It's a tearjerker that will leave you crying a Niagara Falls instead of a river.
The Rating: 3.5 out of 4.
June 17, 2021
I don't usually agree with critics when they universally pan a film. I defended Gemini Man on the basis that its direction and action sc...
I don't usually agree with critics when they universally pan a film. I defended Gemini Man on the basis that its direction and action scenes suited the over-the-top story. But with Rambo: Last Blood (2019) I wholeheartedly agree that it was just plain bad.
This movie is about 1 hour 41 minutes long. But there is only action (which was promised by the title) in the last 15 minutes! The story is so cliched that a 12 year old could have written it. On top of that, I have seen this similar plot play out in more than 12 Hollywood films.
I'm surprised Sylvester Stallone did not release this movie as a straight-to-DVD film. Although, it wasn't a total financial flop, I am certain that if there wasn't the Rambo brand to depend on, then this movie would never have broken even at the box office.
The script and the editing are painfully bad. How the hell did this movie cost $50 million to make when Nicolas Cage's latest movie Primal which looks as cheap as this must have not even been made at a cost of $10 million?
Unless you're a die-hard fan of Sylvester Stallone and/or the Rambo series then have a go at Last Blood. But even if you're an action lover I suggest Cage's super low-budget Primal over this snoozefest. The only thing I'm happy about is that this venture, as its title suggests, will be the last we see of John Rambo.
The Rating: 1 out of 4.
P.S. Rambo (2008) is a much better watch than Last Blood if you're interested in watching a more modern Rambo film as compared to its predecessors.
June 17, 2021
I never liked Power Rangers even when I was young. And after the last Transformers film made me question movies made on merchandise, I had l...
I never liked Power Rangers even when I was young. And after the last Transformers film made me question movies made on merchandise, I had low expectations for this, but wasn't too badly disappointed.
Dean Israelite's direction is top-notch action-wise. The car chase sequences were well directed. Also, the fight choreography was average and I've seen superior battles in low-budget Chinese flicks.
The casting was bad in my opinion. Though, the actors were picked from diverse backgrounds, I've seen more expressions on a supermodels' faces. Lead thespian Dacre Montgomery has the looks but zero talent. Rest of the Power Rangers are equally good-looking but only RJ Cyler (Blue Ranger) stood among the crowd. He provided notable comic relief and without him this movie would've been tedious to watch. Bryan Cranston and Elizabeth Banks provide as much supporting power as they can, and the latter made a good villain.
The best aspect about Power Rangers is that although it's the embodiment of CGI, the storyline is not superficial. Issues like bullying, depression and all other teenage problems were elaborated on perfectly. We can relate to the main individuals when we were their age. This is what many teenage-orientated films nowadays fail to accomplish.
But the major flaw with Power Rangers is how cliched it is. From start to finish the movie has showcased nothing new in its genre, or beyond it. There is absolutely no originality in the chance meeting of the members, the backstory or even the primary narrative. This picture could easily be re-titled as Cliched Strangers.
The verdict is simple. Kids are more likely to enjoy this one than the older people. It's better than the last Transformers movie but that's about it. It's 120 minutes of pure time-pass.
The Rating: 2 out of 4.
June 16, 2021
According to this article , Gerald Butler and Morena Baccarin who played the leads in the first Greenland film will be reprising their role...
According to this article, Gerald Butler and Morena Baccarin who played the leads in the first Greenland film will be reprising their roles in the sequel.
Below you can read my review of the first film in order gauge why I am not that excited about this part being slated for release.
Greeland (2020) Review
Sad to see Gerard Butler continously wasted in by-the-number pictures. Greenland (2020) is a disaster movie which adds nothing new to the genre. Director Ric Roman Waugh does his best with a script by Chris Sparling which seems to copy better apocalyptic films. This feature is pure time-pass although with breathtaking virtual and audio effects.
The Rating: 2.5 out of 4.
June 16, 2021
Who knew racism could be used as a subject for a horror film? Get Out is 2017's best thriller so far. Though it lacks the fast pace of 2...
Who knew racism could be used as a subject for a horror film? Get Out is 2017's best thriller so far. Though it lacks the fast pace of 2016's paramount shocker: Don't Breathe.
Pros: Unparalled acting by all the cast members. Direction pays homage to classic psychological thrillers. Finally we have been given a horror flick made on an original narrative.
Cons: A semi-predictable second half, and the ending could've been way better. The first half is the finest part of the picture, but it could've finished on a high-note, rather than conclude satisfyingly.
The Verdict: If you're into movies like Gone Girl, Don't Breathe, etc. then this one's your cup of tea. It might not gratify enthusiasts of other genres.
The Rating: 3 out of 4.
