Rose Hathaway is a Dhampir, half human/vampire, guardians of the Moroi, peaceful, mortal vampires living discretely within our world. Her legacy is to protect the Moroi from bloodthirsty, immortal Vampires, the Strigoi. This is her story. From: IMDb.com
Directed by: Mark Waters
Starring: Zoey Deutch, Lucy Fry, Danila Kozlovsky and others
Rose Hathaway is a Dhampir, half human/vampire, guardians of the Moroi, peaceful, mortal vampires living discretely within our world. Her legacy is to protect the Moroi from bloodthirsty, immortal Vampires, the Strigoi. This is her story. From: IMDb.com
Directed by: Mark Waters
Starring: Zoey Deutch, Lucy Fry, Danila Kozlovsky and others
Rose Hathaway is a Dhampir, half human/vampire, guardians of the Moroi, peaceful, mortal vampires living discretely within our world. Her legacy is to protect the Moroi from bloodthirsty, immortal Vampires, the Strigoi. This is her story. From: IMDb.com
Directed by: Mark Waters
Starring: Olga Kurylenko, Zoey Deutch, Lucy Fry and others
This is nothing too great and nothing too original either but it simply remains one capably made movie, for the mainstream audience to enjoy.
The more hardened science-fiction movie lover can nitpick this movie to death really. And yes, I also had more than just a few problems with this movie but I simply took this movie for what it was and I also have to say that for a more mainstream type of audience, this is a wonderful big budget science-fiction adventure. It's like the movie "Moon", only with a much bigger budget and far more spectacle involved.
It's as if the film-makers initially wanted to go for a more 'quiet' and realistic, subtle approach but somewhere during production it got out of hand- and especially once Tom Cruise got himself involved, the studio interfered and demanded that the movie would have to feature some more and bigger action in it. Really, when you look back at it you really have to say that the movie its story didn't need most of the action that was in it. Not that it feels terribly out of place, or ever takes you out of the movie but I still strongly believe I would have liked this movie better without all of the action and explosions and such. A true science-fiction movie, with the emphasis on the science, instead of the fiction, as now is the case.
Like I said, this movie is like "Moon", in the sense that it's about a working man in space (or well, somewhere high in the Earth's atmosphere in this case), working for the 'big boss', who slowly starts to learn about his own true identity. But having said that; this movie is being like a ton of other science-fictions as well. It isn't as original or even clever as it likes to present itself (it confuses you, rather than ever truly trying to surprise or impress you with its writing) but like I also said before, this isn't going to bother the more average movie goer. They probably still be surprised at some of the movie its twists and the approach it's taking with its story and some of its characters at times. In in that regard, this also truly is far from the worst science- fiction movie to have come out in recent years. As a matter of fact, it took me back to the days when a new science-fiction movie was still something special and impressed you with its look and approach. And despite everything, I still do admire this movie for its look and approach! It isn't just your typical, average Tom Cruise vehicle and it actually keeps on challenging the viewers with its story. Please don't watch this movie expecting to get some brainless, overblown, science-fiction action flick, or you may end up feeling disappointed with this movie.
Still, at the same time the movie is handling its story poorly at times. Quite poorly to be frank. It does a poor job at handling certain plot lines and characters. You feel that the Morgan Freeman character and his band of misfits for instance should have played a much bigger part- that also was far more important for the movie. After all, this is where the TRUE story kicks in, without spoiling too much about it. They however don't show up until the movie is halfway done already and it almost gets handled like some sort of afterthought. The emphasis never gets put on any other storyline but the one for the Tom Cruise character, even while clearly much bigger and more important things are happening around him. But also the Tom Cruise character himself doesn't really get handled in a very good and effective way. Tom Cruise is a great actor but his character in this movie isn't exactly a very memorable one. You feel that the movie should have given his character and some of the plot lines some more depth, also in order to truly feel involved with it. Basically everything in this movie remains underdeveloped and in some regards it truly feels too shallow as a movie, as if it also didn't want you to feel for any of its characters. Maybe it all was intentional, to give the movie deliberately a sort of sterile feeling but anyway, it doesn't work out all that pleasant or effective for this particular movie.
Besides, the pacing seems a bit off at times. Sometimes it's too slow for its own good, while at others it glosses over a whole bunch of other stuff that seem important but never get handled as such by the actual movie.
Overall, I still have more positive than negative feelings toward this movie movie, so it definitely did a lot of things right, despite all criticism. It was an enjoyable movie to watch and even during the movie its slower moments I still remained interested in it, at all times. Despite not being the most original science-fiction movie out there, story- and concept-wise, you still don't know what is going to happen next and are anxious to find out.
It of course also is a great looking movie, which should come as no surprise, seeing how much it cost to make. I'm not always too impressed with movies that rely heavily on computer effects but I just can't say anything negative about this movie its look or effects. I simply liked it and was enthralled with the movie its world and its overall look. And another thing I also would like to mention; I liked the movie its sound effects! It's something that perhaps is a bit underrated within the science-fiction genre at times but good and original sound effects can truly help to create a world- and sometimes even universe of its own.
So, some negative and some positive things to say about this movie but overall I strongly do feel that this is a perfectly watchable science-fiction flick for the more mainstream audience, as long as they know what they are in for.
After visiting Mont Saint-Michel, Marina and Neil come to Oklahoma, where problems arise. Marina meets a priest and fellow exile, who is struggling with his vocation, while Neil renews his ties with a childhood friend, Jane. From: IMDb.com
Directed by: Terrence Malick
Starring: Ben Affleck, Olga Kurylenko, Javier Bardem and others
This is a movie about an ex-CIA guy on the run, after his identity got
pretty much erased and his former employee is after him to kill him.
Sounds familiar? Well, it should, since "The Expatriate" by no means is
an original movie and it 'borrows' quite a lot from some other similar
and also better known genre examples.
Having said that; this movie still serves its purpose and it remains a
well made one. Can't say it's a great movie but I can't say that it's
ever being an horrible one. A very typical middle of the road type of
flick that never really impresses with anything but at the same time it
also never becomes a bore to you and it's actually a pretty
entertaining watch.
I said this movie isn't being a very original one and that's certainly
true for its story but it still has some original things going for it
though. The settings for instance. How many thriller that you know are
set in Belgium? and it's also good to see this movie features a teenage
character, who also gets played by an actual teenager for a change.
It's also positive she isn't being a nagging or helpless character.
Normally secondary characters like her are there to help to move the
story forward and a simple way to create cheap tension or to throw in
one or two extra action sequences or side-plots. But I must say her
character adds a lot more to this movie and it works out much better
than most of the times would be the case for a movie of this sort.
There is still plenty of stuff that's keeping the movie down though. It
never really becomes clear enough why the Aaron Eckhart character is
such a liability and why he should be killed, according to his former
employees. A 'McGuffin' sort of element could had solved this but there
is never really a clear enough McGuffin in this movie and that is where
the story messes things up. It tries to explain things as the story
progresses but it's all a bit too muddled and it doesn't really ever
work out as anything interesting enough. It also doesn't help that the
movie keeps on introducing new characters, even when the movie is
halfway done already, including some of its key 'villains'.
It's obvious the film-makers were going for a 'Bourne' movie type of
approach, with both its style and story. Even the Jeff Danna music is
quite similar to that of the 'Bourne' movies but I must say that out of
all the 'Bourne' clones, this movie still works out quite well on its
own and remains at all times a perfectly watchable one, that never, in
a distracting way, feels too much like 'Bourne' ripoff.
A better movie than you may expect but by no means a must-see though.
A court martial sends a veteran soldier to a distant planet, where he has to destroy the remains of an alien race. The arrival of an unexpected traveler causes him to question what he knows about the planet, his mission, and himself. From: IMDb.com
Directed by: Joseph Kosinski
Starring: Tom Cruise, Morgan Freeman, Andrea Riseborough and others
An ex-CIA agent and his estranged daughter are forced on the run when his employers mark them both for termination as part of a wide-reaching international conspiracy. From: IMDb.com
Directed by: Philipp Stölzl
Starring: Olga Kurylenko, Aaron Eckhart, Liana Liberato and others
A court martial sends a veteran soldier to a distant planet, where he has to destroy the remains of an alien race. The arrival of an unexpected traveler causes him to question what he knows about the planet, his mission, and himself. From: IMDb.com
Directed by: Joseph Kosinski
Starring: Tom Cruise, Morgan Freeman, Andrea Riseborough and others
After visiting Mont Saint-Michel, Marina and Neil come to Oklahoma, where problems arise. Marina meets a priest and fellow exile, who is struggling with his vocation, while Neil renews his ties with a childhood friend, Jane. From: IMDb.com
Directed by: Terrence Malick
Starring: Rachel McAdams, Olga Kurylenko, Ben Affleck and others
A court martial sends a veteran soldier to a distant planet, where he has to destroy the remains of an alien race. The arrival of an unexpected traveler causes him to question what he knows about the planet, his mission, and himself. From: IMDb.com
Directed by: Joseph Kosinski
Starring: Tom Cruise, Morgan Freeman, Andrea Riseborough and others
A struggling screenwriter inadvertently becomes entangled in the Los Angeles criminal underworld after his oddball friends kidnap a gangster's beloved Shih Tzu. From: IMDb.com
Directed by: Martin McDonagh
Starring: Colin Farrell, Woody Harrelson, Sam Rockwell and others
A struggling screenwriter inadvertently becomes entangled in the Los Angeles criminal underworld after his oddball friends kidnap a gangster's beloved Shih Tzu. From: IMDb.com
Directed by: Martin McDonagh
Starring: Colin Farrell, Woody Harrelson, Sam Rockwell and others
(Review originally written at 7 November 2008) While "Casino Royale" was also far from a perfect Bond movie, I liked the movie for the direction it was heading in. It basically re-imagined and set up the Bond franchise all over again, with a change of characters, style of action and story lines and overall approaches of it all. Instead of further redeveloping and re-imaging, "Quantum of Solace" feels like a movie that is standing still in its evolution and offers nothing new to the revived modern Bond franchise. It's as if this movie is just an in-between movie for things yet the come. But if they continue to redevelop and set up things again for the James Bond franchise in this pace and style, it means that we'll probably see the full new redeveloped style in and characters in 3 Bond movies from now. Bond still doesn't feel like the James Bond character we all grew up with and he is obviously a character still in development, no 'shaken, not stirred' lines, no gadgets, no Q, no Moneypenny, no 'Bond, James Bond' introduction line and heck Bond doesn't even sleep with the Bond girl! It makes you wonder what it is that makes this movie more special and makes it distinct itself from other action genre movie made this present day ant time. The answer is sadly; nothing. With this movie the Bond franchise really doesn't earn its right to exist anymore among other genre pieces in this modern era. Why spend something like a $200,000,000 budget on a movie that is just like any other modern action movie made these days? When I go and see a James Bond movie I expect to see something special. Something different from any other genre movie. Something more fun and entertaining. This movie is like the world upside down! Normally James Bond always used to be a trend-setter for action movies, now it has become a franchise that itself lends from- and imitates different action movies and styles. This movie is already often being compared to the 'Bourne'-movies for a good reason. Its action style with shaky cam, fast editing and all is similar, however also not as good as in any of the 'Bourne'-movies (and I'm not even a too great fan of the shaky cam in the Bourne movies), with has everything to do with the fact that Marc Forster is simply not an action movie director. It already in advance seemed like an odd move to install Marc Forster as the new director of a Bond movie. When you like on his résumé you'll only see drama's and art-house movies. Not anything with remotely some action in it. Normally these directors often surprise when they are given the opportunity to directed a movie like this one, which isn't the case for Marc Forster however unfortunately. For also when you like upon this movie as a stand-alone movie, a movie that has nothing to do with the Bond franchise and simply purely as an action-thriller, this movie is severely lacking. This is due to the very messy story, with shaky motives for all characters and a main plot-line that just never becomes fully clear. Because of the this also the villain doesn't work out. Mathieu Amalric seems like a good and interesting actor but a Bond villain needs to be evil personified. The villain is simply not villainous enough in this movie and has no good interaction with the Bond character. This was the guy Le Chiffre was taking orders from? Hard to imaging! Also its severely lacking with its action and I don't just mean because of its style. For a $200.000.000 budget movie it is surely lacking in some big spectacular and renewing action sequences. It's really a movie like dozens of others, with action you've already seen before in movies that got made 20 years ago, only better looking. But not that you'll notice this though, its shaky cam and fast editing style ensures this. The movie is filled with references to tons of other classic Bond movies, some more obvious than others. Sounds like a fun and good idea on paper, however in the movie itself it often works out more annoying and distracting at times. Another problem with this movie is that it is a direct sequel to "Casino Royale". Maybe it would had been a good idea to announce a direct sequel if you already have the proper script for it. It seems to me that they had a hard time coming up with a good script that connects well to the events of "Casino Royale". Yes, Mathis is in it again but why? Felix Leiter is in it again but why? Mr. White is in it again but why? It all feels so obligatory and doesn't seem to have a significant enough purpose. It's also because of this that the movie feels like its standing style and doesn't develop the new Bond and Bond style further. The movie would had definitely better as a new stand-alone movie, that had nothing to do with the events which occurred in "Casino Royale". Yes, Daniel Craig is in good form again and he is definitely a good choice for a more grittier and humane Bond, driven by his emotion but he simply is given nothing good or interesting to do, which is just a waste of talent. Same goes for basically every other actor within this movie as well. Olga Kurylenko is a waste of a potentially fine Bond-girl, Mathieu Amalric is a waste of a potentially fine Bond-villain and Judi Dench is also in it somewhere. So stop making direct sequels and start finally with completing to set up the Bond character and the new Bond movie style. Oh and also just pick a better script and more suitable director next time please.
(Review originally written at 21 July 2008) "Hitman" is basically a well made and good looking movie but with one big flaw to it. The story just never really flows well. The movie feels inconsistent, with basically just the one action sequence after the other, which really makes you loose interested into the actual story of the movie. Because of this, the story of "Hitman" just doesn't work out. The story instead now mostly remains confusing and not everything seems really connected enough. I'm not saying Xavier Gens is a bad director, or "Hitman" is a bad movie but you can just tell by looking at this that with a more experienced director at the helm, who had the abilities to the make the story flow well, this could had really been a superior modern action-flick. The movie now instead is perhaps style over substance. Especially its action sequences are well directed and great looking, making this simply a fine action-flick to watch. The movie gets really carried by those sequences and are what is making "Hitman" still a seriously fine and enjoyable flick to watch. You don't have to be a fan of the video games to enjoy this movie. Because the story doesn't really work out, the character of agent 47 also doesn't really. They try to give him a more humane face and he wants to start a normal life on his own. The movie builds up and hints to this constantly but in the end it doesn't wrap it up properly, which makes it look like as if all those moments within the movie are pointless and don't serve a significant enough purpose for the main character. Same goes for the love interest played by former model Olga Kurylenko. In the long run you're only wondering; 'Now what was exactly the purpose of this character in the movie?'. Perhaps it's also Timothy Olyphant fault, who plays the movie its main character. At times he's acting too much, rather than being agent 47 enough. Agent 47 is cool and to the point, who never looses his focus on things. In this movie he's constantly struggling with himself and the world and by default he also has way too many lines, in my personal opinion. I think that the character would had worked out way better if he had been an almost complete mute. It would had made the character cooler and more mysterious and would had given the other actors, mainly Olga Kurylenko and Dougray Scott, to do their thing and become the more 'human' face of the movie. For Olga Kurylenko is especially a real discovery. She had starred in movies before but mostly in small unknown small French flicks. But main thing is that she can really act and she of course also has the looks, which helps her a lot. Because of those two reasons she also got cast as Bond-girl in the new Bond movie "Quantum of Solace", which will be released later this year. All in all, "Hitman" is a movie, with superior action sequences, that I enjoyed watching but its story and main approach of things prevent this from being an absolute genre must-see. 6/10 Watch trailer
