Style2

Free Birds (2013) Directed by Jimmy Hayward



No proper story development, no proper character development. Are animated movies just being lazy nowadays? It sure seems so!

Is it fair to say that the CG animated movie genre is past its prime? Most genre movies nowadays seem to be simple rehashes of other ones and come across as quick cash grabs. It's as if the studios aren't trying as hard anymore to come up with anything unique or special anymore. As long as the movie sells and they can make some extra bucks on merchandising, the people up top are happy. It are movies like this that are causing the genre to come to a screeching halt, instead of helping it to move forward and keep pushing the envelop, with new techniques and approaches to the genre. There are just too many genre movies like this nowadays, even coming from some of the bigger and more 'revolutionary' animation studios, which is all sad and disappointing to note. The true creativity, drive, passion and love, that always could be found in these genre movie, seems all to be gone by now.

The fact that this is a mostly formulaic genre flick is only part of its problem. It's a way bigger problem for the movie that it just isn't a very well executed one. It doesn't even take the time for things to get set up and introduced properly. In the first few minutes we are introduced to a farm turkey, that thinks differently and looks different from his fellow turkeys, who are all living there with him, but how or why, we simply never get told. A few minutes later he's living in the White House (yeah, I know, don't ask) and a few minutes later again he gets recruited for a secret mission by some other turkey and together they travel back into time. Everything happens so fast and without a logical explanation. It's annoying really, especially when the movie keeps coming up with its own new convenient rules, right till the very end.

Everything about this movie is just too simple. I'm not even necessarily just talking about its story but also all of its characters and jokes, for instance. Of course there is a love interest and another character who is standing in the way of their love. And of course there is a villain who is just evil for the sake of being evil. And of course the two main characters have a falling out at one point. I know this is something basically all animated movies feature but it usually is something that isn't as distracting or becomes all quite as annoying and predictable as is the case in this movie. It's all because most other movies at least make an effort to be remotely creative or original with anything. This one isn't ever trying hard enough though.

It's also disappointing really how this movie is just barely ever becoming anything funny. The comedy, just like the entire movie, is far too simple, lazy and predictable. Even little kids will have to agree that this isn't a very funny movie, with also no real likable and entertaining enough characters in it. It's all far too forgettable, which is perhaps the best thing about this movie; it luckily won't stay in your memory for long.

Worse than "Planes" in my opinion, for what it's worth.

4/10

Watch trailer

Movie clip: Free Birds (2013)





Two turkeys from opposite sides of the tracks must put aside their differences and team up to travel back in time to change the course of history - and get turkey off the holiday menu for good. From: IMDb.com



Trailer: Free Birds (2013)


Two turkeys from opposite sides of the tracks must put aside their differences and team up to travel back in time to change the course of history - and get turkey off the holiday menu for good. From: IMDb.com





Directed by: Jimmy Hayward
Starring: Woody Harrelson, Owen Wilson, Dan Fogler and others
Current release date: November 1, 2013

Trailer: Free Birds (2013)

Two turkeys from opposite sides of the tracks must put aside their differences and team up to travel back in time to change the course of history - and get turkey off the holiday menu for good. From: IMDb.com






Directed by: Jimmy Hayward
Starring: Owen Wilson, Woody Harrelson, Amy Poehler and others
Current release date: November 1, 2013

Assault on Wall Street (2013) Directed by Uwe Boll



An action flick based around the financial crisis? Sure, leave it up to Uwe Boll to come up with a thing like that!

This is an Uwe Boll movie, so lots of people are going to jump on it, regardless of its quality or intentions. But in all fairness and objectivity, is it truly a bad movie? It's a pretty dumb and maybe even borderline offensive movie but it most certainly is far from a terrible movie as well!

It's a pretty ridicules movie but no more than most other low budget genre flicks. The only main downside of the movie is that it's made hard at times to get behind the movie its main character. After all, he goes on a violent streak against bankers, who no doubt all had normal lives outside of their work and a wife and kids back at home. Seems maybe like Uwe Boll has a personal beef against the financial world or perhaps has lost lots of money during the crisis and with this movie he is venting his anger or living his fantasy, of wanting to seriously hurt those who are responsible for the situation, in his eyes and mind. The movie tries to justify things by portraying the bankers as James Bond type of villains but it's not really something that works out very convincing.

Or perhaps you should simply see this movie as a modern exploitation flick, that uses a much talked about and still relevant subject, lots of people can recognize themselves in and have a strong opinion about. And perhaps that's also the best way to look at this movie. Fore if most definitely isn't ever going for a too realistic approach with its story or violence either. You also don't feel that the movie is trying to make a true statement against anything or has a deeper sort of meaning to it.

Another silly thing about the story is that basically every sequences involves something that's related to the financial crisis. Every 'good' character gets hit by the crisis and every 'bad' character makes sure they get hit even harder, once they start to get up again. Seriously, everything about this movie feels heavily exaggerated and there's nothing too realistic or convincing about its main story, which to me is another indication not to take this movie too seriously either.

But in all truth, this movie just never becomes a truly bad one. It actually has a pleasant feel and pace to it. Sure, it doesn't begin violent or action packed and the movie takes its time to set its story and characters up at first but still the movie never drags or becomes a boring one. You also don't feel that the action enters the movie too late. The buildup to it is pretty good and effective, so it never feels like you are watching a slow or boring movie here. So yes, I actually have to say that Uwe Boll did some good things with his directing of this movie, as weird and as improbable that may sound.

I also liked some of the acting. Dominic Purcell perhaps isn't all that great, especially not when he is required to have and show emotions but other actors such as John Heard, Eric Roberts, Edward Furlong and Keith David are pretty good and enjoyable in this.

It's a good enough movie but obviously also nothing more than that. Just give this movie a fair shot. You actually could end up liking it.

6/10

Watch trailer

No Saints for Sinners (2011) Directed by Nathan Frankowski



All this movie basically consists out off are a couple of tough guys blowing each other away with guns. And why? because of some drugs and money. OK, that's fine but why do I have to watch this? There just isn't's a very pleasant or engaging main story to ever latch onto.

The movie has no good emotions in it, also not in the least because of its main characters. It isn't uncommon for a movie to have 'bad' guys as the movie its main protagonists but the movie needs to give you something to make you like them and care about them as well. This movie never does any of that and to be frank, I don't even remember any of the names of the main characters and I only just finished watching the movie.

But it's especially disappointing that this movie never seems to be following a good main plot line. Everything remains terribly underdeveloped and it just never seems like the movie is going anywhere- or building up toward something good or original with its story.

No, once you have seen a couple of crime flicks already, there basically is no good reason for you to ever watch this movie as well, for it's doing absolutely nothing new or surprising. But the fact that it's predictable and a movie by the numbers isn't even the worst thing about it. The worst thing is that it doesn't even manage to handle all of the genre clichés in a good and effective enough way.

Well, I won't say it's the worst genre movie I have ever seen but it still remains one of the least effective and engaging ones I have seen in a long while. Main thing that the movie still has going for it is its look. Despite a low budget, the movie isn't as cheap and terrible looking as you perhaps would expect. So who knows. Maybe the director is actually capable of doing some good movies in the future, when he has a more decent script to work with.

4/10

Watch trailer

Christmas in Compton (2012) Directed by David Raynr



It's close to that time of the year again, which also means dozens of Christmas related movies get released, of which most just aren't very good or creative unfortunately, which is something that can be said about this movie as well.

I just don't know what this movie was trying to tell with this story and what it was hoping to achieve with it. Just like most Christmas movies, it's trying to have a warm and heartfelt type of message in it but I'm still not really sure what it was supposed to be in this case. All I could see were a bunch of people acting foolish and making stupid choices.

It probably also has everything to do with the fact that this is a poorly told movie. First of all, it's featuring far too many characters, which makes things confusing and is a reason why it's very hard to ever get into this movie. It's therefore also hard to really ever care about anything or anyone in this movie. Because the story feels all over the place, none of the developments work out that great or involving either. It's trying hard to be a warm and heartfelt movie and no doubt that it got made with all of the right intentions but they really should had spend some more time on its script and at bringing it to the screen in an involving and interesting enough way.

The movie foremost is still a comedy but it's the sort of comedy in which its characters are just talking a lot and very loud, hoping that at least some of it shall come across as something funny. It's not like this movie features any clever and witty moments in it, or truly snappy dialog. It makes this mostly ineffective as a comedy as well.

I also really don't get why movies that feature minorities often rely on racial stereotypes, more so than any other movie ever does. It's just another sign of the lacking creativity of this movie. It really all feels like some lazy film-making, that got put out there for the holiday's and to make a couple of easy, fast bucks on.

There are obviously some far better, more fun and heartfelt Christmas movies to watch out there, to say the very least.

3/10

Watch trailer

Cloud Atlas (2012) Directed by Tom Tykwer, Andy Wachowski & Lana Wachowski



This appears to be a movie which the opinions are mostly split on. Either people love it or they cringe at it. Personally I was taken by its grandeur and consider this to be a true epic, not because of its action or visuals but more so because of its elaborate story and the storytelling in particular, that takes the movie to multiple different places and times.

It's quite amazing the amount of story lines this movie is following and the amount of different character it follows around, throughout different period pieces and places. What's even more amazing is that it all feels extremely well balanced. This is most likely due to its pace, which is wonderful. Even though the movie is almost nearly 3 hours long, it never feels like you are watching a 3 hour long movie. I's such a fast paced movie, that never dwells on anything. It never sticks too long to a certain character or storyline either. The storytelling might confuse or scare off some people but really, once you are just simply paying full attention to the movie and nothing but the movie, it isn't all that hard or complicated to follow.

What I also loved about the story and the storytelling was its diversity. The one story is set in the distant past, while another is being set in the far off future. The one storyline is serious, while another is being more comical. One involves science-fiction, the other dry drama. It are things like this that make this an incredible divers movie to watch. You could say there is something for everyone to enjoy in this. Some plot lines might interest you, while others might not work out as well for you personally. But it's still very easy to feel involved with each and every different storyline and character in this movie because of its superior storytelling and actors involved.

Many different great actors play many different great characters in this movie. Sometimes you won't even notice a certain actor in a certain role, making this movie great and fun to watch on repeated viewings. Sometimes it's still very apparent, also when they have some bad makeup applied. This works a bit distracting at times and I also just don't get how a $100,000,000 could possibly have some bad makeup effects in it. Oh well, guess they couldn't get everything right for this long, grand and complicated epic.

You could debate about it whether or not all of the story lines feel connected well enough and that the actions of certain characters in the past truly affected that of the others, with the stories set in a future time. Personally, it didn't always felt strong and tight enough for me but still I could obviously enjoy all of the different story lines and also the movie as a whole, even while it's main premise came across a bit flawed to me.

It's also a great looking movie with all of its visuals. It successfully recreates certain time periods and environments, with its tone, costumes and cinematography. If nothing else, this movie is at least going to get nominated for some visual related Academy Awards, for sure.

It's not a movie everyone is going to enjoy or appreciate but then again, there is a big fat change you might end up loving it just as much, or even more, as I did.

9/10

Watch trailer

Smiley (2012) Directed by Michael J. Gallagher



You could say this is being an horror flick for the internet generation. Finally an horror movie that uses the internet phenomenon effective and creatively, or well, for its first half at least.

You tell this a movie made by people who at least know something about its subject. It was not just some 60+ year old Hollywood executives saying; hey, the interwebs is popular now days, lets base an horror movie around it! And then create a movie that already was 5 years behind with its subject and was mostly relying on big clichés and stereotypes. The way they used the internet and webcam sessions in particular made it apparent that the film-makers were still in touch with the 'internet-geration' and knew all about viral videos and the way internet hoaxes are born. This is the foremost thing this movie has going for it but it most definitely is not a movie that is without its flaws.

The way the movie starts of makes it seem like this is going to be a typical modern horror flick, in which a killer, supernatural or human, you don't really know for sure yet, is on a killing spree. however the moment that the movie starts to become something different and you realize there is more to the story, it just becomes a less interesting and effective genre movie, also because it starts to become pretty early on already where the movie is heading at with its story and what the big twist at the end is going to be. Or well, at least for me it started to become apparent quite early on already, probably because I have seen plenty of horror movies already, doing the same sort of things, in one way or the other.

It's a bit of a shame all, since this movie definitely showed some real potential and also seemed to have plenty of good ideas in it, that just weren't always handled that well. It had a good killer and a good concept behind it, that could had caused an internet hype but I don't think this movie shall leaves it mark all across the internet. It's not quite daring or effective enough for that.

It's definitely a problem that the movie tries to be clever and tries to make you doubt about what's real and what's not and what's truly going on in its story. It's a problem because it isn't really done in a very subtle way, which also definitely makes it just far too apparent where the movie is heading at. It also seemed that the movie was trying to get a bit more deep and serious with things but it's never really handled in a provoking and interesting enough way.

So it's really being a movie that does plenty of things right but also still does plenty of things wrong. I'm still giving it the benefit of the doubt, since it most definitely is a good looking movie, with also some effective genre moments and touches to it. It's definitely more watchable than just the average modern genre attempt, though the weaker, less interesting and less effective second half of the movie still takes away a lot from it.

7/10

Watch trailer

Clockers (1995) Directed by Spike Lee



There is no denying it that this is a good and well made movie but at the same time I also still had loads of problems with it!

The way I see it, this is being a pretty good portrayal of live on the streets in the '90's. It picks a mostly realistic approach but still I just can't really 'feel' this movie. I never felt involved with any of the characters in it or to any of the dramatic events and developments. It doesn't make this movie bad but it does indeed make this movie a bit of a one dimensional experience.

And remember, this is an 1995 movie. So everything that was considered to be hip and 'thug life' might seem a bit ridicules and less cool in today's perspective. The whole attitude and way of talking and the way everyone dresses makes this movie really a product of its time. In that regard this movie also really reminded me of "Kids", which coincidentally or not, got made in the same year as this movie. It makes this movie less relevant to watch now days but really, it's nothing I was holding against the movie.

I would had most definitely preferred it if this movie was using a more straightforward style of storytelling. The movie as it is seems to be wanting to focus on far too many different characters and tries to do and tell too much. It also really has its own style to it, when it comes down to its storytelling, which was nice and helped to give this movie an unique feeling but at the same time it also made the movie unnecessary hard and not all that pleasant to follow at times.

Another thing I also disliked about this movie was its pick of music. The movie mad some bad music choices, in which the music often would swell and become melodramatic at moments that really were uncalled for. It absolutely distracted and most of the time didn't suit what was happening on the screen at the time.

But really, I though this movie still had some hints of a great movie in it as well. One thing was its already earlier mentioned unique and distinctive style. Spike Lee always has had an unique and distinctive style of his own and he manages to put a lot of that in this movie successfully. There are some interesting moments in this movie, from a more technical and movie-making perspective. There was some good camera-work for instance and also very little wrong with the movie its editing and pacing.

The movie its story in essence also really seemed to be a solid one but I do feel that they perhaps should had picked some different perspectives to keep- and make things a bit more interesting and effective. Wouldn't this movie for instance had been better and more interesting if it told things more from the Harvey Keitel's character perspective? Who knows and it's not like the movie bad or interesting as it is right now but while watching this movie it constantly gave me the feeling it had more potential and things could had been done better.

I don't know, perhaps the movie was also being a bit stuck between being a gangster movie and a more realistic one. It never felt like a true gangster flick and it never felt like a true realistic movie neither. Producer Martin Scorsese perhaps should had stepped in a bit more often, since he definitely is a kind of director who can more successfully blend realism with tough and tense gangster/crime movies.

Not trying to sound too negative. The movie is good enough as it is but it doesn't ever reaches its full potential.

7/10

Watch trailer

Trailer #2: Cloud Atlas (2012)

An exploration of how the actions of individual lives impact one another in the past, present and future, as one soul is shaped from a killer into a hero, and an act of kindness ripples across centuries to inspire a revolution. From: IMDb.com

Directed by: Tom Tykwer, Andy Wachowski & Lana Wachowski
Starring: Tom Hanks, Halle Berry, Hugh Grant and others
Current release date: October 26, 2012

International trailer: Cloud Atlas (2012)

An exploration of how the actions of individual lives impact one another in the past, present and future, as one soul is shaped from a killer into a hero, and an act of kindness ripples across centuries to inspire a revolution. From: IMDb.com

Directed by: Tom Tykwer, Andy Wachowski & Lana Wachowski
Starring: Tom Hanks, Halle Berry, Hugh Grant and others
Current release date: October 26, 2012

The Thing (1982) Directed by John Carpenter





(Review originally written at 25 January 2009)

It had been quite some years since I had last seen this movie and the earlier brilliant and fresh movie version "The Thing from Another World" from 1951 was more fresh on my mind. I think I can say that "The Thing" is actually even a better movie. It's a great horror with a touch of science-fiction.

To put it boldly, this movie is like "Alien", only set at the Antarctic. It has the same sort of atmosphere, build up, look and of course a killer alien on the loose. However this is not an "Alien" clone. The movie is just too good for that to call it one.

I think I can say that this is one of the most paranoid movies ever made. It's actually quite easy to make a good and effective horror movie once you know to create a certain level of paranoia into the movie. In this movie you just never known who the alien is, which makes you very uncertain of things and makes you literally trust no one or his motivations throughout the movie. With this given element the movie knows to build up a great tension and atmosphere for the movie. It's horror elements mostly gets feed from these elements and it's what makes "The Thing" such a superior and classic movie within its genre.

You really have to give John Carpenter credit for this movie. He has done lots of classic horror movies throughout his career but this one perhaps is his most brilliant one. He builds up the movie extremely well and very effectively. What also helps with this are Ennio Morricone's moody musical score (while normally Carpenter composes the music himself for all of his movies) and the camera-work from later Oscar-nominee Dean Cundey. Why doesn't he do horror movies anymore? Now days he mostly makes bright looking, happy movies, while in the past he did the camera-work for some fine and classic horror flicks, including "The Fog" and "Halloween", which also got directed by John Carpenter.

It's also a quite gory movie to watch. The still at the time very young Rob Bottin did a very good job with all of its make-up effects. Some truly gory and unexpected things are happening throughout this movie, so know what to expect.

It also knows to remain a realistic movie throughout, even though it of course doesn't feature a very likely main plot. It's because of its directing handling, acting and its writing that the movie works out that way.

The movie doesn't feature many characters and also no big names playing them, except for Kurt Russell of course. This also keeps the movie realistic and keeps all characters on the same level. It helps for the atmosphere of the movie, since you also don't know who is going to die next and where and how. It increases also the overall paranoid feeling of the movie.

A brilliant classic atmospheric genre-piece!

10/10

Watch trailer

Article 99 (1992) Directed by Howard Deutch





(Review originally written at 1 June 2008)

This was a movie I really enjoyed watching. It on top of that had a first rate cast, with lots of big names in it. Too bad that the movie with its themes is too moralistic though. The movie tries to send out a message and tries to make a statement but it does this too forced with its sequences and distracting story-lines. Because of this it becomes totally unlikely, which causes it to simply not work out.

Nevertheless the movie is more or less still being saved by the fact that the movie does not pick a pure dramatic approach with its story but also at times a pure comical one, also with some of its characters. This of course makes the movie a pleasant one to watch, even though the story goes over-the-top at times. I also must add that most of the movie its comical feeling and moments also really work out thanks to mostly mainly the musical score from Danny Elfman.

What a great ensemble cast this movie has. A movie with a cast like deserved to be better known and seen by more. Ray Liotta, Kiefer Sutherland, Forest Whitaker, Lea Thompson, John C. McGinley, John Mahoney, Keith David, Eli Wallach, Lynne Thigpen, Troy Evans, Jeffrey Tambor, these are all some big names and they are all in this one film. You would expect that it perhaps is a bit overkill but all of the roles are well balanced out throughout the movie

The movie tries to tell an important story of the treatment of war veterans and their medical care once they've returned to the States, or rather said the lack of medical care and all of the red tape that goes with it. But basically the hospital sequences in the movie "Born on the Fourth of July" give a way better and more powerful image of this, even though it's not entirely about the same subject as this movie.

Problem with this movie is that it too badly wants to make a statement and send out a message. It sort of downgrades the movie but luckily the movie its entertainment still makes this a perfectly watchable one.

7/10

Watch trailer

Platoon (1986) Directed by Oliver Stone




(Review originally written at 22 February 2007)

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This still is the best and most powerful and gritty Vietnam war movie around.

It's a war movie that shocks and confronts not necessarily with its graphic images but more with its psychological elements. It shows what a war can do to common man and how it can make and break characters. So above everything, "Platoon" is really a character movie that tells the story of two different sergeants who clash and a young recruit being in the middle of it all.

The movie shows the duality of men and isn't afraid to show the dark side of every person. It makes the movie confronting and effective to watch.

While watching this movie it makes a realize that it's a movie that only could had been made by a Vietnam veteran. The small little details such as of the atmosphere and characterize behavior are too detailed and uncompromising to have been written by someone who hasn't been even close to Vietnam. "Platoon" is a sort of autobiography movie by Oliver Stone, who put some his own Vietnam war experiences into this movie. The movie, like basically every Oliver Stone movie, handles controversial subjects and is very straightforward, without really picking any sides.

The movie features only 2 or 4 real visual confronting sequences. The movie doesn't need anymore than that to be powerful, or to try and make its point. It lets the psychological elements take of that instead. It makes "Platoon" a movie that doesn't try to impress but nevertheless leaves a powerful and lasting impression through its way of film-making. It also provides the movie with some really powerful sequences, with of course the death of Sgt. Elias Grodin as the most classic and memorable one. I still regard it as the greatest death sequence out of movie history, even though it's completely over-the-top.

The movie is mostly carried by the characters that are in it. None of them are really formulaic or predictable and they are being played by some great actors. This movie features some great casting, with lots of actors that later became huge stars, such as Forest Whitaker, John C. McGinley and of course Johnny Depp. Charlie Sheen does a good job at playing the character, trough whose eyes the entire story gets told. But it are Tom Berenger and Willem Dafoe who really form the movie. In a non-formulaic way they represent good and evil.

"Platoon" is luckily not only just a psychological powerful movie with great characters but also visually a great movie to watch. The battle sequences are effective and impressive to watch and really give you a sense of how it must have been like over there, as does the entire movie by the way. The cinematography by Robert Richardson is wonderful and the Academy Award winning directing by Oliver Stone is just great.

"Platoon" is of course also the movie that got Adagio for Strings eternal fame. The piece of classical music it features prominently the movie its most important sequences. It works powerful and effective, no matter how often it gets overused in the movie.

War is hell and this movie really shows that.

10/10

Watch trailer

Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within (2001) Directed by Hironobu Sakaguchi & Motonori Sakakibara



(Review originally written at 13 February 2007)

The movie is really good looking but also surprising to see how much the techniques have outdated already. I remember when the movie came out how impressive and revolutionary it all looked. People were actually worried that soon real actors would be replaced by computer animated characters and the way of film-making would change forever. On my most recent viewing I wasn't that impressed anymore and thought that especially the facial expressions looked quite wooden. Amazing how fast and how much computer animated techniques still evolve every year. Who knows, maybe in 50 years from now people would look at this movie and call this the 'first step' in the direction of revolutionary new film-making.

This movie was much hated and also bombed at the box office, although I think that the professional critics were really that negative about it. I actually remembered this movie receiving more praise than hate from them. It was the audience that caused this movie to fail and bomb, although the movie itself is also to blame for that. It really wasn't the best choice to include 'Final Fantasy' into this movie its title, since this movie has really nothing to do with the immensely popular game series, with the same name, from the same director and company. It was the reason why people disliked and even hated the movie. Who knows, with a completely different name and marketing, this movie might had become an huge and popular hit.

The quality for it is definitely there. The story is original and interesting enough and its look and style also definitely makes this movie one well worth watching.

The story is quite unusual, since it prominently features some spiritual subjects. The entire main plot line relies on this. Yet the story is told in such an easy and understandable way that you start believing in the story, even though it gets highly unusual at times, especially toward the ending.

With just the story of the movie, the movie really wouldn't had been a good one to watch. It therefor features also lots of action sequences. Some of the moments and characters reminded of movies such as "Aliens" and "Starship Troopers". It was obvious that the movie was also inspired by this. The movie would certainly had been bad and a bore without the Deep Eyes, the military characters of the movie. It makes the movie great and pretty awesome to watch,

The movie is also definitely helped by the fact that it has a great, Nazi looking and Nazi like acting villain, voiced by the incredible James Woods. The character has such a great evil look in the movie, without exaggerating things too much.

All of the characters but especially the environments and aliens are greatly animated. It's awesome to see the streets of a post-apocalyptic New York City, with lots of details in it. The movie features some great big and impressive looking sequences.

All the characters are being voiced by some well known actors, such as; Ming-Na, Alec Baldwin, Ving Rhames, Steve Buscemi, Peri Gilpin, Donald Sutherland and the earlier mentioned James Woods. These are not only great actors but also persons with great voices. So great casting work here!

Also the musical score by Elliot Goldenthal is surprisingly great. He doesn't compose an awful lot of big scores but when he does, the end result is always something special and great.

Of course the movie isn't as great as it could had been and it has some missed opportunities with its story and characters. Nevertheless a perfectly great and entertaining movie to watch!

7/10

Watch trailer

Top