It almost have been a year since I have seen the first Jack Irish TV movie but thing I remember about it is that it was a very complex and talkative movie, in which characters kept popping up and names were being dropped all over. It must have done some things well as well, since I eventually did end up liking it more than not. This second TV movie is pretty much the same, only even more complex and less focused with its story, making this far from the most pleasant or engaging thing to watch.
It really is OK for a movie to have lots of characters in it and to be a very talkative movie, as long as it manages to maintain a good focus as well. In this movie it's hard to tell what is going on at times and what its main plot line is supposed to be all about. Besides, there are a bit too many needless distractions in the story, causing this movie to feel overlong as well. All in all, plenty of reasons to call this movie a bad and unbearable one to watch but fact actually still is that this movie still remains a perfectly watchable one, all throughout.
It's still a real quality detective movie, with a good look to it and some fine performances by its actors, Guy Pearce in particular of course. Even though you most likely won't always understand what's going on, it's reassuring to see that the characters at least still seem to know and understand what's going on and what they are doing in this. It makes the movie feel less messy than it sounds and really, it's not like you'll never understand one bit of what's going on.
The movie may feel a bit overlong but it still never bores, since there is always something going on in its story and something happening on the screen. It therefore also still is a mostly watchable movie but not one you should go out of your way to see.
When a foreign exchange student arrives in a small upstate New York town, she challenges the dynamics of her host family's relationships and alters their lives forever. From: IMDb.com
Directed by: Drake Doremus
Starring: Felicity Jones, Guy Pearce, Amy Ryan and others
Is this movie good action entertainment? Yes, sure! Is it a great movie as well? No, definitely not!
To be frank, this movie never lives up to expectations. That of course doesn't mean that the movie is a bad one as well but it nevertheless was disappointing to see how little this movie actually did that was new, or differs from any of the previous Iron Man movies and superhero movies in general.
This movie promised to be a somewhat darker and more serious in tone Iron Man movie, in which Tony Stark gets truly tested, falls and has to rise up again as Iron Man. But really, all of the villains and situations Stark gets himself involved in this movie aren't necessarily all that different and more threatening or dangerous than any of the situations and characters Iron Man had to face before, in any of the previous Iron Man movies and lets count in "The Avengers" as well. As a matter of fact, the movie pretty much has the same tone as the other previous Iron Man movies and isn't really that much darker or less silly, both story-wise and comedy-wise.
I have to say that in some regards this even is a somewhat poor movie. Especially story-wise it's lacking. The pacing is off and the story feels somewhat messy for the first half of the movie and also please don't watch this movie expecting to get any depth or decent enough background to anything. It's shallow, big, action entertainment, that constantly pushes its characters to the background and rather wants to focus on- and show you the next big action set-piece.
This definitely goes at the expense of the whole Tony Stark and Pepper Potts relationship but also at the expense of the Stark and James Rhodes friendship. It's hard to detect any emotions or heartfelt moments in this movie and it's therefore also hard to truly feel involved with the story and characters at times.
The whole villainous plot is also somewhat disappointing. It's just too simple really. They are terrorist and they are evil and that's it really. There is no big plan to conquer to world, get rich, or anything along those lines. It's also 'annoying' how little screen time the main hero and main villain of this movie get to share on the screen. I never like it when a movie its villain and hero basically are miles away from each other and hardly have any form of interaction.
It shows you how lazy and simplistic the writing can get at times for this movie. But this actually also goes for its action moments. I lost count the moments that Tony Stark got saved, at the very last moment, by his suit. Tony Stark falls off something? Don't worry, his suit will save him! Somebody throws/fires something at Tony Stark or holds him hostage? Don't worry, his suit will fly in again to save him! It just isn't very creative and too easy really. Especially of course when the movie starts repeating the same patterns over and over again.
But oh well, this movie still remains pretty much up to par with the other Iron Man movies, as weird as that may sound after all my criticism. This is not any better but also most definitely not any worse than any of the previous two Iron Man movies. It just never does anything new or special with its concept or characters, which is the reason why this third movie mostly feels like a disappointing one. Some more creativity and originality would have been nice!
But Robert Downey Jr. is still in great form and all of the right action and special effects are still there, to turn this movie into an enjoyable, silly, overblown, action spectacle. Action-wise this movie doesn't disappoint and it's the main thing that keeps this movie going and entertaining to watch.
So it's all still good and fun to watch! Just don't expect the ultimate Iron Man movie or one that does things completely different from any of the other Iron Man movies.
Tony Stark uses his ingenuity to fight those who destroyed his private world and soon goes up against his most powerful enemy yet: the Mandarin. From: IMDb.com
Directed by: Shane Black
Starring: Robert Downey Jr., Guy Pearce, Gwyneth Paltrow and others
Marvel's "Iron Man 3" pits brash-but-brilliant industrialist Tony Stark/Iron Man against an enemy whose reach knows no bounds (Mandarin). When Stark finds his personal world destroyed at his enemy's hands, he embarks on a harrowing quest to find those responsible. This journey, at every turn, will test his mettle. With his back against the wall, Stark is left to survive by his own devices, relying on his ingenuity and instincts to protect those closest to him. As he fights his way back, Stark discovers the answer to the question that has secretly haunted him: does the man make the suit or does the suit make the man? From: IMDb.com
Directed by: Shane Black
Starring: Robert Downey Jr., Guy Pearce, Gwyneth Paltrow and others
Not sure if the Jack Irish movie series will become a long running or
hugely popular one but it definitely has some potential in it.
Guess this best can be enjoyed if you are already familiar with the
character and stories from the novels by Peter Temple. After all, the
main character seems to have a long and interesting history, which
doesn't really gets elaborated much on in this first movie.
You could describe this as a detective movie, with on a side note that
it's main character isn't a detective at all. But it still most
definitely does have a typical British detective series vibe to it,
even though it's an Australian production. The way the story plays out
and all of its characters are very typical for this, so it's also best
to be enjoyed by those who are able to appreciate a good detective
series.
That also means this isn't a terribly big production, with action set
pieces or lots of other excitement. I would say on the contrary really,
since this really is foremost a thinking man's movie. It's a movie you
literally constantly need to pay attention to, or else you might loose
track. It all starts off standard and formulaic but soon starts to
develop into something much more and bigger.
The foremost reason why it all works out good and interesting enough is
because the movie has a good main character in it, played by Guy
Pearce. He's not the formulaic or perfect type of guy, you often see in
detective series. I won't say he's a bad guy either but he certainly is
not without his flaws or demons haunting them.
I won't exactly call this a perfect movie, since I do believe it will
loose some of its viewers at certain points, due to it's complicated
story and the movie also does in fact feels much longer than it in fact
truly is. It's only 90 minutes short but if you would had said to me
afterward it's a hour longer, I would had believed it as well.
But there definitely is plenty of potential in this series, as long as
it keeps building on its characters and perhaps the next times feature
a bit of a smaller and more humble type of plot, that's not only just
easier but also more involving to follow.
A good look, some great acting, a nice premise, a great time period it
is set in, this movie has it all. However one thing I can't say about
this movie was that it was also doing a good job at getting me involved
with its story.
I always like movies set in a specific time period in the past,
especially when they have a great and detailed look to it, such as this
movie does. This movie is set in the 1920's or 1930's and it does a
good job at setting the right tone for it. It's definitely a movie with
a good look to it and you could tell where most of the money went to,
besides its actors.
It really as an all-star cast in it, with perhaps not the world's
biggest actors but more the sort of actors who all are 'hot' at the
moment and are on a good streak. I know it's easy to make fun of Shia
LaBeouf but in all truth and honesty, this kid always had some real
talent and potential in him. He didn't always made the right movie
choices but with this movie he definitely shows his potential once more
and even more than that; he shows he can carry a movie and play a
convincing and demanding role in a more 'serious' and heavy movie. Also
actors such as Tom Hardy, Guy Pearce, Jessica Chastain, Mia Wasikowska
and Gary Oldman show up, making this a real assemble piece, though in
all truth, some of them show up for only about 5 minutes.
That perhaps should tell you something about its storytelling already.
It isn't always focused and interesting enough. At times the pacing is
off and its hard to tell whether the movie wanted to be a fun and
entertaining gangster flick or a more serious and realistic one. It
doesn't explore certain aspects well enough and pushes some things too
much to the background at times. It was hard for me to every truly get
into the movie.
It seems that the story just wasn't all that great and interesting
enough, or perhaps it was written with a different style in mind.
Either way, it doesn't make "Lawless" the best or most engaging movie
to watch, though for most part it still remains a perfectly watchable
movie. It remains a capably made- and well acted out movie, that was
missing something to let it rise above the level of just average.
Well, I can't say this is a bad movie but it's definitely one formulaic
and unremarkable one. I probably will forget all about this movie, in a
day or so but having said that, it's still a good enough little movie
to have a good time with.
It's a very typical modern Nicolas Cage flick, in which Nicolas Cage is
playing a very typical Nicolas Cage character and goes through some
very typical Nicolas Cage sort of situations. He's playing an average
guy, who gets stuck in a certain situation and needs to get out of it
fast, before he and his loved ones end up getting killed. If you have
seen one of those action-thrillers you have basically seen all of them
already and there also is nothing too original or surprising about this
movie.
The movie is using a good and interesting enough premise, that keep
this a perfectly watchable one, all throughout. Just don't expect to be
blown away by any of it. It has some twists and turns in it but nothing
that should shock or surprise the average movie watcher.
Of course the story has plenty of problems and plot holes in it but I
don't even really hold that against this movie. It's a movie that still
serves its purpose well enough and provides plenty of entertainment.
Changes are you wont be bored by this movie but it just really isn't
one that will leave a lasting impression on you.
You still feel that the movie could had done so much more with its
story and characters but the movie decides on being safe and average
rather than new and daring. Nothing wrong with these sort of movies of
course and they always remain perfect to watch on a day when you have
absolutely nothing else to do and simply want to have a good time,
without having to think too much about anything. It's not an all that
spectacular or tense movie but it at least never gets boring and mainly
thanks to that, the movie remains a perfectly watchable enough one, all
throughout.
See it or don't. You wont feel any better or worse afterward.
Quite surprised that this movie is being liked so well. It really is nothing more than a dumb. B-movie flick. It's the sort of stuff Jean- Claude Van Damme used to do in the early '90's. In that regard I also really don't understand how a respected actor such as Guy Pearce ended up playing the lead role in this movie.
The movie isn't even being an original one. It 'borrows' from a whole bunch of other movies, most notably "Escape from New York". Guess the film-makers wanted to do a "Escape from New York" set in space and forgot, or simply just didn't bothered, to come up with something good and original on its own.
But is the movie at least fun and entertaining to watch? Not halve as much as it could and should had been. There just isn't enough variety in this movie and lacks some good action set pieces. There is never a big confrontation or anything of that sort and even though it's a fast paced movie, there isn't really an awful lot happening in the movie when looking back at it, by the end.
The special effects also get ridiculously bad to watch at times. Common, this is an 2012 movie! These sort of effects are simply not acceptable anymore, no matter how low the budget on this movie was. I have seen some low budget '80's that had better effects than this movie in it!
Another aspect that prevented me from ever really liking this movie was its main character, played by Guy Pearce. He was supposed to be a wisecracking tough guy but his lines mostly worked out annoying. He just wasn't being a very convincing action-hero, no matter how many muscles Pearce gained for his role.
Granted this is not the worst B-genre movie you could watch but there is just nothing about it that stands out and it's still definitely more being a bad movie than a good one.
So this movie wants to be seen as a standalone movie, rather than a
prequel to Ridley Scott's own 1979 movie Alien, which takes place in
the same 'universe' as this movie, so lets also take it that way. And
as a standalone genre movie it is pretty good, though it's nothing new
or too exciting really.
It's actually a shockingly standard movie, with a quite standard story
in it, though I perhaps should also add that I have seen plenty of
other science-fiction movies, that did some similar things as this
movie as well. I still say shocking, since after so much secrecy
surrounding this movie, I expected something deeper and more clever
perhaps. I just never really got any of that out of this movie.
This movie only has hints of a great movie and great ideas in it. in
that regard this movie maybe works better as a setup movie for a
potential sequel(s).
The final 30 minutes of the movie are definitely its best but before
that it mostly is being a slow moving one, even while it gets apparent
pretty early on already what direction the story will be heading at and
what will happen next. But still, the movie is such a well made- and
good looking one that it never becomes boring to watch neither.
Despite not wanting to be taken as a prequel, the movie still makes a
few nods to the other previous Alien movies, especially to the first
movie "Alien". For instance with certain scenes, things that can be
seen, pieces of dialog, characters and character behavior, etcetera.
It's all enough to please the fans but not too much for those who
aren't familiar yet with any of the other previous Alien movies. So in
other words, it never gets anything too annoying or distracting from
this movie, for anyone.
The casting is being a bit of a mixed bag. Some actors fit their roles
very well, while other clearly don't. Charlize Theron for instance
isn't being very good or convincing as a tough, cold cooperate
executive. She just doesn't has the right looks for that, unless she
gains 30 pounds and stops showering for a week or two, like she did for
her Oscar winning performance in "Monster". Michael Fassbender on the
other hand was much better and probably also the best and most
interesting character out of the entire movie, even though he plays an
android that is not supposed to have and show any emotions. It perhaps
should also tell you something about the movie and its characters that
he was being the best and most interesting one, out of it.
Seems that the movie wanted to have far too many characters in it.
Really, 5 or 6 characters should had been the maximum. But because
there are so many different ones, you don't ever really feel like you
get to know any of them and some of the characters even get pushed to
the background way too much, which also goes at the expense of some of
the great actors in this movie. There are even persons with hardly any
lines in this movie. The Asian looking guy for instance didn't had any
lines, until its very end! I could be wrong though but point is that I
didn't even knew what his purpose was. And that is the case with too
many of the characters in this movie, that is besides for most part is
missing a good, strong but above all visible main character in it.
Another thing I really didn't like about this movie was its musical
score. Now, I know that Jerry Goldsmith is dead but just listen to the
scores of the other Alien movies. It's all being somewhat similar in
tone to Goldsmith's score and share some of the same motifs. The score
for this movie, composed by Marc Streitenfeld (who?), really didn't
seem to suit this movie and its atmosphere, or it at least did nothing
to strengthen it. It's just being too much its own thing.
Still it really isn't a movie that you could or should hate. The only
way someone could hate on this movie, is if that person was expecting a
new brilliant movie like "Alien", or one that was being more similar to
it at least. But really, you should see this movie with a more open
mind and don't have you expectations up too high for it. When you are
able to, you will get to see a pretty good genre movie. Really,
technically and visually there is very little wrong with this movie.
It still remains a great and well made genre movie but it's just still
nothing to get too excited about, in my opinion.
(Review originally written at 1 August 2009) An Australian western. How weird does that sound? Still the atmosphere and nature of Australia seems to fit the genre perfectly. It's a dirty, raw and bleak movie all in one. It's also a movie that's a bit too much aware of its own style. It often prefers its artistic and deeper meaning approaches over its true story. The movie at times definitely feels like its style over substance and it prevented me from truly finding this a great movie. Of course westerns are often about its style and atmosphere but this movie definitely over does this at times. No, the movie was not as great as I had initially expected it to be. It had a more than great concept and enough elements in it to expect this to be a fresh and original movie. It's still fresh and original all but the whole package still slightly disappoints. Having said that, "The Proposition" is simply still a good movie to watch. It doesn't have the best written story but the way it's being told still makes this a good genre movie. It's of course slow, doesn't always feature a lot of dialog and features some typical characters from the genre., that all makes this a good watch, especially when you're into 'modern' new westerns, such as movies like "Unforgiven", "Open Range" and "3:10 to Yuma". The movie has a surprising cast, with mostly Australian actors that are also well known beyond the boundaries. Best known is of course Guy Pearce and John Hurt but it's really Ray Winstone who gives away the best and most impressive performance of the movie. To me he also was the main character and I'm not too sure if the movie would had worked out as well without him. A good and original western from Australia. 7/10 Watch trailer
It really is OK for a movie to have lots of characters in it and to be a very talkative movie, as long as it manages to maintain a good focus as well. In this movie it's hard to tell what is going on at times and what its main plot line is supposed to be all about. Besides, there are a bit too many needless distractions in the story, causing this movie to feel overlong as well. All in all, plenty of reasons to call this movie a bad and unbearable one to watch but fact actually still is that this movie still remains a perfectly watchable one, all throughout.
