I have to admit that I am not a die-hard Die Hard fan but I did enjoy the first movie, it had this battler charm that was carried to the other films. Well at least this charm was carried to first few. The charm of the exciting and cleverly constructed action film that we saw in Die Hard was definitely not present in 5th installment to the franchise. It's a dying and frail old man, and I wish someone would finally put it to rest. It needs not to be awaken again. But I'm sure my heartfelt plea will fall on deaf ears and before you know it Die Hard 6 would be screening in a theatre near you.
At this point I would usually summarise the plot of the film but it feel like such a waste of words to do so. Nevertheless it would be unfair to, you, the reader. It is difficult to try to explain the chaos that I saw into somewhat coherent summary but I will do my best. For those you have seen the trailer, you have pretty much seen most of the movie. Our hero once again finds himself in trouble but this time in Moscow, Russia. Oh, how exotic of Hollywood to venture to Eastern Europe. This time, Mr John McClane (Bruce Willis) is to save his son Jack (Jai Courtney) from a life of crime. Director, John Moore tapping into "feeling guilty for not being there for my delinquent child" story. But I'm not convinced and I didn't watch the film to witness the acting brilliance that is Bruce Willis. Nevertheless an attempt of being somewhat convincing would have been a nice change. In reality McClane Jr. is in fact US federal agent in Russia. What is an American agent doing in Russia meddling in Russian domestic politics? I don't know but I believe it might have been discussed in the film but it most likely gotten lost between car chases and jumping off buildings. The film has a very thin plot that is placed around the action, it does not complement it nor does it provide any relevance to the film. It is simply watching one and half hours of explosions and impossibilities.
The Die Hard franchise is not known for its realism. However there is stretching reality and there is downright ridiculousness. And Die Hard 5 was just plain ridiculous. As the audience, are we to believe that John is in a car that is flipped over four times and comes out virtually unscathed?! Or the fact he jumps off a 4 storey building into a pool and not even one dislocated shoulder? The acting was on the terrible side too. I feel that even Willis is completely bored with this franchise. What happened to the bald angry man that we "loved"? McClane is practically emotional disconnected with the movie. Like he doesn't even care whether or not this works out.
McClane Jr. was equally unimpressive, his character is so boring and 2 dimensional. There was little incentive for the audience to care about McClane Jr. or the forced father-son relationship drama.
The plot twists were predictable and thus defeats the purpose of being a twist. Furthermore the movie is unengaging and downright boring. I was so bored that I went to the bathroom even though I really didn't need to. I know I'm over sharing here but seriously this is how bored I was with this movie. It really couldn't more boring (well it probably could).
It was so unimpressive even the action scenes felt forced and painful to watch. In the modern day action film it is not enough to simply blow things up, the action is often stylised and carefully constructed. And thus Die Hard 5 simplistic action scenes could not compete the innovative ways to entertain audiences.
Final Verdict: This was disappointing effort from the creators, a lazy film for everyone involved. Lifeless, passionless chaos pretending to be a film. Give it a miss. 4/10.
A guide to recognizing your saints is a little known independent piece from the writer and director Dito Montiel. A guide to recognizing your saints is the film adaption to the Montiel's autobiography of the same name. The film follows Dito as an adult played by Robert Downey Jr. however the film is mostly in a long flashback to Dito's younger days in New York. The film explores the harsh realities of a young Ditto (Shia LaBeouf) living in working class Queens.
A guide to recognizing your saints is not a perfect film however it was still amazing and incredibly real. Films about the ghettos of the 80's have been around before but this one does have heart. There might be a few questions about the stereotypes that were used by Montiel in the film and possibly in the book however it still felt real. I have to say credit has to go the amazing cast that was in this film. The young actors in the film held their own in a film that is difficult and emotionally driven. Although their performances are not perfect however it was impressive for young actors at the time. I was particularly impressed by Channing Tatum who plays the abused delinquent and best friend of Dito, young Antonio.
Playing the tough guy for Tatum is probably not a difficult given that he oozes in the tough guy demeanour. However it really was he ability to bring the emotional aspect of Antonio that made me notice that Tatum in fact can be a talented actor. Of course I had seen him in other films, usually b-grade romantic comedies but to see him in a serious role was a pleasant change.
LaBeouf as the young Dito was impressive however less so than Tatum, although LaBeouf is as usual has likeable personality which carries him in most of his films. Maybe LaBeouf lacked some of the maturity his older co-star had or whatever it may be I felt that he just didn't deliver the emotional sensitive that was needed in a few scenes.
It's a hard life, young Antonio
The older cast including Dianne Weist and Downey Jr. are per usual fantastic. Weist who plays Dito's mother is amazing, Weist is able to demonstrate a distressed but strong woman in with such ease. And he character in many ways doesn't belong in such a rough and unforgiving environment.
A guide to recognising your saints is ultimately depressing but this does not make it disappointing. The film allude to the fact that many people who grow up in Queens stay in Queens and never truly leave the poverty and bleakness of their situation. This is the ultimate reality of the film. Older Dito walking around in the streets realising the not much has changed since he left all those years ago. For those live in lower class and impoverished areas such as the world that is depicted in the film there is an overwhelming sense of hopelessness and Montiel has captured this well in the film. This partly captured by the flash forward to present day older Dito realising his friends have remained stuck in much of their old ways. Arguably for some this might it's detriment, being so uncomfortably dark. The film shows the difficulties and realities for some people and it may not make the audience feel good after the film however this is not its purpose.
The end feels a little neat and brings the film to a full circle and though this would seem like the predictable end to such a dark film, to possibly stop people from going home feeling like the need to watch a romantic comedy to recover. Thus I do believe that Montiel may have taken some creative liberties when ending the film and what I presume the ending of the book as well. However I cannot be sure of course.
I usually do not like slow paced films however the film was well paced, it had the dramatic pause when needed however never over using it. I particularly enjoyed the creativity in which he tells his story, sometimes there is a slight delay in audio as you see the pictures flash before, giving the audience this sensation of a distant memory. Although I didn't like the constant close-ups with the actors in the film and the shaky camera annoyed me. I understand the camera was suppose to feel as if you are with Dito and his mates but it's a personal peeve of mine if the camera is not steady.
Final Verdict: A guide to recognizing your saints is a dark film however does end on a much more uplifting note which may please the wider audience however felt forced for me. I thoroughly enjoyed the dark and gritty realism that Montiel had infused in the film. Despite my dislike for shaky camera work, Montiel had used interesting film techniques that adds to the nostalgic feel to the film. I was impressed by the cast particularly the young actors who showed maturity in a emotional difficult film. 7.9/10.
There you are.... long time no see. Don't worry I am coming back and it's going to be exciting because I am reviewing a really awesome movie next time I post!!
It’s telling of the times when romantic comedies are now based on purely platonic relationship between two men. Just like JD and Turk from the hit TV show Scrubs has repeatedly attempted to convince others, “its guy love between two guys. And there is nothing gay about it.” The bromance; the shared bond between two guys may be the strongest bond two people can have is the central theme for I love you, man.
I personally love this idea of male bonding relished and celebrated. And although male bonding have been central to many movies but exploring a relationship between two guys that is deep and profound that goes beyond just hanging out, playing poker and drinking is often rare, if it’s ever been attempted before that is
Hi everyone so this movie, Celeste and Jesse Forever which I read about in one of the movie magazines and it looks really good. And then I went on YouTube and it looked up the trailer and looks really good. The movie should be released later this year.
I have to admit that I do love a good "quirky" romantic comedy. And when I was wasting copious amounts of time on YouTube and found the trailer for Ruby Sparks, I was keen to watch it. I think I fell in love with this genre right after 500 Days of Summer. And although Ruby Sparks does not reach the standard that 500 Days of Summer set, it was a good enough effort for me to be pleased.
This week’s film has the formula for being an amazing film with a very talented cast; Judi Dench, Cate Blanchett and Bill Nighy, written by Patrick Marber (screenwriter for Closer) and directed by Richard Eyre and yet Notes on a Scandal was an incredibly disappointing film.
The plot is intriguing, a young school teacher Sheba Hart (Blanchett) has an illicit affair with a 15 year old student (Andrew Simpson) and when a fellow teacher and friend Barbara (Dench) finds out Barbara promises to keep her secret. But of course it’s not all what it seems Barbara is a little too attached and a little too obsessive and downright malicious, does Sheba really know what she has gotten herself into
For some reason I thought this movie had Wil Anderson in it. But now that I know he's not in it and the bad review you gave it I'm less inclined to watch it.
This is the movie The Departed ripped off/copied right? I didn't really like the Departed (I'm probably the only one) but heard that this was a really well made movie.
Thanks for reading and commenting. I mean seriously the Cold War ended like 20 years ago. I guess in this X-men is based in the 60's but having the US-Russian bullshit in movies based in modern times is annoying.
I read your review I really liked it. It was different to what I thought about the movie. You should really see the other X-men movies they are pretty good too well at least I thought so. I think I'm just a fan of the whole franchise. Although for some reason I don't consider the Wolfverine movie part of the X-men series. I think its cause it doesn't really include the other mutants (I think)
Thanks for the comment, and for the suggestions I will take note and see if I can actually make to a screening and if I do I will definitely make a post on it. If you have more suggestions please comment more. There so much going on in the Festival so it going to be impossible to watch everything.
Add Comments
Read More
Comments (2)
Comment by Samira
on The Dark Knight Rises, 2012
Filmsi
The Ramblings