Style2

Babe (1995) Directed by Chris Noonan

Posted by: Frank Veenstra Posted date: 5:10 AM / comment : 0 , , , , , , , ,



If you could blame this movie for one thing, it is that it started a long running and tiresome trend of talking animal movies. In all seriousness, this is of course not something you should hold against this movie, fore "Babe" as a movie is about as good as a talking animal movie could get and you should blame all other genre movies for not being as heartwarming, fun and original as this movie.

Guess it's true this movie is mostly using the Disney formula, minus the musical numbers but that's a big part of the reason why this movie works out so well. It actually feels more Disney-like and entertaining than any live action movie Diseny ever produced and it feels just as good and heartwarming as some of Disney's greatest family orientated animated movies.

It really is a movie that uses some of the oldest and most formulaic genre ingredients and when you when you truly start to think about it, this really is a movie by the numbers, in which nothing should really come as a surprise to you but yet it all works out very well for the movie. It's probably most likely due to it that it remains a very involving movie to watch. The movie is filled with some very likable characters and the story, even while it's all being formulaic in its core, has plenty of good developments to it.

There is basically always something new happening in the movie and it's always moving and never has a slow moment in it. I do believe that's also why the more dramatic and emotional undertones of the movie work out so well. The movie doesn't dwell on them, which actually makes all of it feel more honest and heartfelt. The movie doesn't ever force you to tears or to make you root for the little pig with over-the-top moments and drama or swelling dramatic music. It's actually a far more subtle movie than that, which again, does in fact gets you more involved with its main characters and the story.

And this goes for everyone. It's perfect family entertainment, at which both the young and old ones can laugh, marvel and be entertained, all throughout. It's not an incredibly childish movie and it's not a hard too serious one either. It manages to find a perfect balance, somewhere in the middle, making this a perfectly watchable, heartwarming and likable movie to watch, for the entire family.

Another key as to why this movie works out so well is because it gets approached as a serious movie. Lots of effort got put into it and everyone involved obviously took their jobs very serious. This means it also took its audience serious and the movie never settles for anything less than perfect.

The movie for instance has a great look to it as well. The farm doesn't even really looks like a real farm but more like a fantasy farm, especially also in all of its wide-shots. The fantasy like atmosphere and premise still don't ever gets in the way of its realism though. As far as you could call a talking animal movie realistic of course.

And who would had ever guessed a movie about a talking pig would be James Cromwell's breakthrough role, at the age of 55. He even earned himself an Oscar nomination for his role in this movie, which he throughout deserved as well, even while he doesn't do an awful lot of talking throughout the movie.

But it are of course still foremost the animals that steal the show. Thanks to some nifty special effects, it really appears as if the animals are talking but the movie even deserves more credit for its animal trainers. The timing often is perfect and it even is successful at letting different animals interact with each other, which must have been a hard thing to accomplish. Also the voice casting for all of its animals is just perfect, with Hugo Weaving as a standout as the veteran sheepdog Rex.

Another thing that truly adds to the movie is its musical score by Nigel Westlake, who got brought in after Jerry Goldsmith's score got rejected. It's funny how often the speediest of composing jobs for movies can be the best ones.

Great harmless and heartwarming entertainment for the entire family!

9/10

Watch trailer

Star Trek: First Contact (1996) Directed by Jonathan Frakes

Posted by: Frank Veenstra Posted date: 2:29 PM / comment : 2 , , , , , , , , , ,



Generally this movie is being regarded as one of the best Star Trek movies and rightfully so! Besides, it's a genuinely good science-fiction movie and just movie in general!

In essence it's featuring a simplistic and straightforward main story again but things get spiced up and made interesting by the fact that the movie is for most part taking place at 3 different locations, all at the same time. We have Picard battling the Borg aboard the Enterprise, Riker on Earth, trying to help out Zefram Cochran and plot line with Data in the Borg queen's chamber. It keeps switching back and forth, which keeps things going and interesting as well. It never dwells or sticks with one main character for too long and besides the beauty of all of it is that each of the different story lines strengthens the other and are all intertwined of course.

What makes the movie all the more effective are its villains. I'm not necessarily talking about the Borg queen but more the Borg themselves. They are big, threatening, zombie, terminator-like characters making them scary as well as strong adversaries. And unlike most of the other Star Trek movies, the main story doesn't focus on the villain(s) and their evil plan and the Star Trek crew trying to resolve this. It more focuses on the Star Trek crew getting something done themselves. It's an interesting take on things and perhaps also lets them come across less hero-like and more human-like instead. It makes the story also warmer and more involving, as opposed to the coldness of some of the previous other Star Trek movies.

There is plenty of room for personal stuff in this movie, without ever becoming a soap-opera. The characters all feel fleshed out and have an interesting background story to them. You don't necessarily need to have seen any of the previous Star Trek movies or TV-series episodes to understand- and get to know the characters in this movie. It still helps though, fore some things the movie still relies on it that you have seen "Star Trek: The Next Generation" episodes, leading up to this movie.

But all of the drama and characters aside, this of course above all things this remains a science-fiction movie. And as far as Star Trek movies go, this is definitely one of the more spectacular ones. There is plenty of action in it, as well as a big space battle, which is a bit of an oddity for a Star Trek movie, believe it or not. The special effects are besides looking better than ever before on any other Star Trek movie and this definitely feels like an high-budgeted science-fiction action/adventure, also with all of its settings, costumes and makeup involved.

The movie further more features a great and beautiful musical score by Jerry Goldsmith, who with his music pretty much embodies this movie and the Star Trek-series in general.

This is the one great Star Trek movie to watch, even when you really aren't into Star Trek at all.

9/10

Watch trailer

Soldiers of Fortune (2012) Directed by Maxim Korostyshevsky

Posted by: Frank Veenstra Posted date: 7:51 AM / comment : 0 , , , , , , , , ,



Seriously, this movie could had been a lot worse. At least its not being one of those cheap looking B-action movie flicks. It actually is a technically pretty well made movie, with of course also one truly great cast in it.

Believe it or not but this movie actually stars Sean Bean, James Cromwell, Ving Rhames, Christian Slater and Dominic Monaghan all in one special soldiers of fortune team. A cast list every movie would and also should be jealous of. No idea why they did this movie but I guess they need a paycheck like this, every once and a while. it was also great to see Colm Meaney as in the villain in this movie. It's funny but I was wondering not too long ago what Colm Meaney was up to now days, since I hadn't seen him in anything for years now. And then boom! His face popped up in this movie, still looking the same as 20 years ago.

Storywise, the movie was really dropping the ball toward its end, which was a shame since I really was with the movie at first. It has a ridicules concept but at least it got presented convincingly enough, also thanks to its fine actors of course. After a while you'll start to realize the movie isn't going anywhere anymore with its story. It's as if half way through they threw away the script and decided to put in some simple action sequences instead. I truly think that this movie and its story had far more potential in it, so that's truly a big waste.

It's not a particularly spectacular or involving genre movie to watch but it at least isn't boring or offensively bad, in any way or form. It's definitely being a better movie than just the average B-genre movie attempt and I hope that director Maxim Korostyshevsky continues making movies and who knows, maybe one day he'll have his big breakthrough, which seriously isn't anything unlikely, since you can definitely tell the right skills and talent are there. All he needs now is a more decent script and a bigger budget to work with.

Not a great genre movie but a good guilty pleasure.

5/10

Watch trailer

RKO 281 (1999) (TV) Directed by Benjamin Ross

Posted by: Frank Veenstra Posted date: 4:31 AM / comment : 0 , , , , , , , , , , , ,





(Review originally written at 16 May 2009)

This is more of a shot docudrama with big name actors in it, rather than a movie that tells a real story. To me this movie was lacking a bit of a point and it didn't achieved much with its story or characters. It's a quite distant movie in which everything remains on the surface. Questions such as who was Orson Welles, why was he such a genius and how "Citizen Kane" influenced basically all later cinema are hardly being answered or handled at all. As a matter of fact this movie isn't even really about Orson Welles or the shooting of "Citizen Kane" at all. It's more about the battle of getting the movie made and eventually released.

The movie does have some interesting things in it, that explain how "Citizen Kane" got first thought off, what the influences were and how it caused lots of troubles for the persons and studios involved but it does this in such an observe documentary kind of way that you just never feel involved with the story or any of its characters. The movie just doesn't always flow well and it doesn't always know to keep its main focus on the right things.

Of course the movie is not horrible, for a made for TV-production it's simply still a quite good one, with some good production values and a great cast involved.

Unfortunately it's not a really well cast movie. Sure it has big names n it but big names aren't everything. Was Liev Schreiber really the best pick to play Orson Welles? I just don't think so. I like Liev as an actor but more as a supporting actor. Some actors just aren't suitable to play important main leads. He of course also looks very little like Orson Welles. The movie also has further more James Cromwell, John Malkovich, Fiona Shaw and Melanie Griffith but it's perhaps only Roy Scheider who knows to make an great and lasting impression with his role.

Worth a go if you're already a bit familiar with Orson Welles and the movie "Citizen Kane", otherwise this movie will hardly keep your interest throughout with its superficial, more documentary-like, telling of the story

6/10

Watch trailer

Species II (1998) Directed by Peter Medak

Posted by: Frank Veenstra Posted date: 10:07 AM / comment : 0 , , , , , , , , , ,





(Review originally written at 3 January 2009)

Well, at least this movie was better than the first. This is because of the simple reason that this movie is so entertaining to watch. It doesn't try to impress but it just brings some simple and good B-movie horror fun!

It must be also due to the movie its settings that this movie is such a fun one to watch. The entire movie is set at an amusement park.

The Ghoulies are more like Gremlins in this movie. In the first movie they were only walking around without serving a real purpose. In this movie they are the heart and soul of the entire picture. They are causing some mayhem and each and every Ghoulie has a distinctive character of its own.

It's a good thing the movie doesn't take itself too serious. It gives the movie a good campy feel and look over it. The movie is often being plain silly and it doesn't try to make sense or create a believable story. Something that the first "Ghoulies" movie didn't do. So really, this movie is surprisingly better and much more watchable than its predecessor.

Perhaps the movie is being a bit too silly and not serious enough at times. This really goes at the expense of the movie its horror. I feel that as if this movie would had been more effective with its horror as well, this movie would had been an even better one to watch. The movie doesn't really have any scares or gore in it.

Of course nothing of this movie really impresses. The acting and story-line are all weak and kept thin. Perhaps you have to be really into the genre to appreciate and enjoy this movie simply for what it is; some simple, fun entertainment!

5/10

Watch trailer

Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron (2002) Directed by Kelly Asbury & Lorna Cook

Posted by: Frank Veenstra Posted date: 4:25 PM / comment : 0 , , , , , , , , ,





(Review originally written at 9 June 2008)

I never was too anxious about seeing this movie. I mean, an animated movie about horses? Nevertheless I still decided to give this movie a shot, since it visually looked fine and the musical score by Hans Zimmer was just great. The end result was sort of relieving but also disappointing.

The time that big animated movies only got made at the Disney studios are far in the past. DreamWorks Animation proved with its past movies "The Prince of Egypt" and "The Road to El Dorado" before that it could make good animated movies with an own style and aimed toward a different public the Disney movies always got aimed at. Nevertheless they sort of go into the more mainstream direction with "Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron". It follows the safe and usual formulaic road of an animated movie, that is predictable in almost every way possible.

The movie is wonderfully animated and visually there is a lot to enjoy while watching this movie. Unfortunately the story is not doing much justice to its animations, or better said the way the story is told and progresses.

Thing is that the movie its story just never could interest me. It also lacked a clear main plot-line and didn't seemed to have the right proper character treatment in it. You just never care about the characters and you're never frightened by the villains because just non of them are properly developed. The movie often repeats itself throughout and the action/chases and all are just more of the same the whole time. Spirit is really lacking a spirit. And its getting kind of annoying seeing animals all the time reacting and thinking as humans, in order for the viewer to be able to bond with the animal characters.

Positive thing is that it was a good move not to give the animals human voices. The images and interactions between the animals speak for themselves and you always understand them, though like I just said before, it's kind of annoying that they are doing this in a more human behavioral way.

The musical score nevertheless still brings some life to the movie and often its action. The music is so loud during some sequences that you can't help being blown- and carried away by it. It's yet another fine musical score by Hans Zimmer, who also did the music for previous DreamWorks animated movies. There are also some songs being sung by Bryan Adams but those songs are mostly blah and predictable sounding nonsense. Guess they tried to achieve the same thing Disney's "Tarzan" achieved by using Phill Collins, as a sort of singing narrator and describing character's thoughts and emotions. Didn't quite work out though.

Still somewhat watchable for the movie its visuals but it's not a movie that shall leave an awfully big impression on you.

5/10

Watch trailer

The Queen (2006) Directed by Stephen Frears

Posted by: Frank Veenstra Posted date: 11:37 AM / comment : 0 , , , , , , , , ,



(Review originally written at 9 June 2007)

 An interesting viewpoint! I don't think anyone ever expected a movie to be made focusing on the Royal family during the events after the death of Princess Diana. As a matter of fact, I don't believe many people ever thought a movie would be made about Elizabeth II, at least not while she was still alive. In many ways this movie was a daring project. Also not in the least because it was about a delicate subject. The British Royal family is always a delicate subject but the death of Princess Diana is an all the more delicate subject, since it was an event that touched so many people all over the world because she was so loved everywhere. A daring project that payed off, judging by all the critical acclaim it received.

 The British Royal family is perhaps one of the most inaccessible and distant still existing monarchies, since they rarely ever show their true emotions, which is mainly due to Elizabeth II, who always seems like an emotionally bland person with an always bland expression on her face. Tough for a movie to pick through this 'mask' to show the real humane side of the Royal family. This movie does attempt to do this by showing what happened behind the walls during the days after the fatal accident of Princess Diana in Paris. It provides an insightful view but we of course can only guess what truly went on behind the walls. It's viewpoint surely made this movie an interesting to watch but I don't feel that the movie always made the right choices with its storytelling.

 I think this is one of those rare movies I wouldn't had mind seeing being 3 hours long. There is so much to tell, also about the characters and what they think and feel. Instead now the movie is even below 2 hours long that focuses on the entire Royal family and other key players. It has as a result that the queen and therefor also most of the movie its emotions gets pushed to the background at times, because of the many different other characters that are in the movie, with as a result that the Queen character still remains a sort of a mystery. I just don't feel that I now truly know who Elizabeth II is and what drives her and why she continues doing things the way she does. Yes, the movie created some more sympathy for her but I just wouldn't exactly considered it to be the ultimate resource about Elizabeth II.

 The way the movie progresses is also rather predictable. The movie doesn't offer a lot of surprises, which is of course also due to the fact that the movie is based on true events. It makes the emotions and drama of the movie weaker, since it's too obvious how the movie is planned out and how it builds up to the inevitable ending. The movie only truly surprises with its characters. It was surprising to see that Prince Philip (James Cromwell) and the Queen Mother (Sylvia Syms) were even meaner, stiffer and old fashioned persons than the Queen herself. Especially Prince Philip was a surprise, since I only know him of TV, when he just walks behind the Queen and never does or says anything. When I was much younger I didn't even knew she still had an husband! I believe the first time I ever noticed him was during "Party at the Palace: The Queen's Concerts, Buckingham Palace" in 2002.

 I've never been a big fan of using real archive footage in movies because it just never fully blends in with the rest of the movie and its atmosphere. This movie uses a lot of archive footage, from Princess Diana herself and of the people in the streets, giving their comments about the lack of response from the Royal family.

 In the end the movie still becomes a bit too much of a respectful tribute to the royal family instead of an objective observation of the events. At least that's the feeling the ending gave me.

 Aside from that all, the movie is a well made one. Stephen Frears is of course a competent director and he made the movie in the right atmosphere. Some of the sequences are really well constructed, which is also thanks to the fine cinematography and surprisingly good musical score.

 Of course the movie would not had worked out at all of the actress playing the Queen didn't do her job right. With Oscar winner Helen Mirren you just can't go wrong. She really becomes the Queen in this movie and she even looks like her! Definitely true that her performance carries the movie. The rest of the cast doesn't really look like the real persons at all, which was a bit distracting. I mean I didn't ever saw Prince Philip, I just saw James Cromwell. And I didn't saw Prince Charles, I just saw a bloke trying to play Prince Charles. Michael Sheen also doesn't look much like Tony Blair, except in his last sequence, when his distinctive grin gets prominently shown. Nevertheless, through his fine acting, Martin Sheen is still highly credible in his role.

 An interesting movie because of the point-view it is told from and a well made and good looking movie, that just isn't good enough with its drama and emotions and almost lets the story tell itself, which causes it to be rather predictable in how it unravels and builds up.

 7/10

 Watch trailer
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)
Copyright © 2014 Boba_Fett1138's movie reviews
⬆
Top