Movies


Looper (2012)

Clint: 4.4/5 stars, 8/10.
Carolyn: 5/5 stars, 9/10.
Native rating: 4/5 stars Netflix, 7.8/10 IMDB>

It’s really hard to go wrong with time travel, Bruce Willis, and Joseph Gordon-Levitt. I am probably fucking up by not quite rating this 5 stars like Carolyn…. But it’s just not quite as up there as, say, 12 Monkeys, another movie where [spoilers] Bruce Willis meets a younger version of himself.

LINK URL: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1276104/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

Resident Evil: Retribution (2012)

Clint: 3.4/5 stars, 7.6/10.
Carolyn: 3/5 stars, 5/10.
Ouch. MAJOR DISPARITY from Clint’s rating. It’s so very rarely 3/10 different with us!

Native rating: 3.9/5 stars, 5.4/10.

I have to admit I barely remember anything about this movie just a few days after watching it, so while it entertained me… It wasn’t anything super spectacular in the story department.

It’s a good thing that they are only planning one more movie in this franchise. It’s run its course, and something to tie it all together is the only way for it to not keep getting worse.

LINK URL: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1855325/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

VIDEO: MOVIE: REVIEW: Visioneers (2008)

Clint: 2.8/5 stars, 6.2/10.
Carolyn: 3/5 stars, 7/10.
Native rating: 3.2/5 stars, 6.1/10.

First off, this is NOT a comedy, and shouldn’t be billed as such. It really messes with my enjoyment of a movie to expect a comedy and not get one. Argh!

Second off, not much really happened… It felt slow.

Third off, it was not just slow, but sad-and-slow, a painful combination.

This was a weird glimpse into an alternate earth, where people literally explode from stress, to the point of it being a national issue.

Very surreal. Quite random. Lots of scenes that just don’t connect to the plot at all, and are just kind of there… But also great cinematography, highly unique situations, good actors, and overall a very well-painted picture.

Yet I didn’t like it as much as I could have. This really reminded me of Wristcutters:A Love Story in that respect.

LINK URL: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0833557/

VIDEO: MOVIE: REVIEW: The Bourne Legacy (2012) [Bourne 4]

Clint/Carolyn: 3/5 stars.
Clint: 6/10. Carolyn: 6.6/10.
Native ratings: 6.8/10 IMDB.

This just didn’t hold up to the other ones.

Where’s Matt Damon?!? Why do they keep mentioning his character if he’s not going to be in it? That confused me the most. I kept wondering if the main character was simply another actor playing Jason Bourne, or was another character. It wasn’t made clear ot me. Very distracting.

And then also.. It just wasn’t very good. Barely passable to me. It seemed a bit disjointed and haphazardly put together. But it still had a good budget, and some good action. Yeah…Some.

LINK URL: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1194173/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

VIDEO: MOVIE: REVIEW: My Last Five Girlfriends (2009)

3.6/5 stars, 7.6/10 from both of us
Native rating: 2.7/5 stars Netflix, 5.7/10 stars IMDB.

It was a bit of a chick flick — watching this guy go through 5 women. Relationships, yada yada….

But it had enough quirkiness — including gratuitous visual quirkiness to the point of directorial masturbation [not literally] — to keep interest going.

The comedy ended, but not as early as usual, and the quirkiness survived.

It was kind of surreal — a suicide dream sequence — a lot more visual-driven than I would have expected.

The moral of the story? Life goes on. Surprising that this is a necessary message, but it is.

[And by the way… The first 4 girls were progressively less hot, until the black chick {Naomie Harris} at the end who landed smack dab in the middle of the hotness of the other 4 girls.]

LINK URL: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1050002/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

VIDEO: MOVIE: REVIEW: The Adjustment Bureau (2011)

Clint: 3.6/5 stars, 8/10.
Carolyn: 4.6/5 stars, 9/10.
Native rating: 3.6/5 stars Netflix, 7.1/10 IMDB.

Carolyn to Clint: “Why aren’t you into it more? ‘Cause you’re not on your period and you’re not a chick?”
Carolyn liked it better than Next (2007) …. I definitely didn’t.

This is another Philip K. Dick-story-based movie, as we’ve been on a kick of watching those ever since a Slashdot article mentioned how much Hollywood loves making movies based on his stories.

This is best described as, perhaps, a supernatural romance. Fantasy genre — not sci-fi as it’s mis-categorized — with a bit of thriller action, but mostly romance driven.

Random IMDB comment: “It was a mind stimulating speculative film, a rather philosophical treatise on free-will versus determinism.” That may be going a bit far, but this does hint at various philosophical quandries, like that of The Matrix.

LINK URL: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1385826/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

VIDEO: MOVIE: REVIEW: Impostor (2001)

Clint: 3/5 stars, 6.4/10.
Carolyn: 3.4/5 stars, 7/10.
Native rating: 3.2/5 stars, 6.1/10.

Another movie based on a Philip K. Dick story … which is something we’ve been doing lately. But not as good as the previous movie based on a Philip K. Dick story that we last watched: Next (2007).

This one had fewer twists than Next.

However it had a few similarities to Next: A guy wanted by the government in order to [SPOILER ALERT] stop a nuclear explosion that happens, driven by his love for a girl, and with either Tony Shalhoub or his evil twin Jose Zuniga (who basically looks just like Tony Shalhoub, if you ask me).

It also had some similarity to Total Recall (both versions) [which is also based on a Philip K. Dick story] — a guy wanted by a government that claims that he is somebody else than he thinks he is.

I’m starting to think Philip K. Dick isn’t quite as creative as Hollywood thought. I’m seeing some common themes in these PKD-story-based movies.

Anyway, this movie suffere dfrom a common flaw in movies like this: It’s all just a big chase scene. But even more so in this one than usual. Enough that it dragged it down by lack of characterization and plot development. Total Recall (2012) had more characterization than this!

Impostor was still an enjoyable dystopian-future movie… But it could have been a lot better.

LINK URL: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0160399/

Next Page »