Dec 31, 2011

The Last Song, 2010

The Last Song, 2010
Director: Julie Ann Robinson
Cast: Miley Cyrus, Liam Hemsworth, Gregg Kinear

Stage: Home theatre

The Last Song in short:Ronnie's (Miley Cyrus) and her younger brother, Jonah's, parents are divorced. They live with their mother until this summer they are sent to live with their father (Greg Kinnear) in a small town on the beach. Ronnie resents her father and has no intention of being friendly or even talking to him for the summer. But after meeting a handsome guy and beginning to fall in love, Ronnie starts rediscovering her love for music, something she shares with her father. Reconnecting with music revives a kinship with her father which proves to be the most important relationship she may ever experience.

Preps: Wow, the honour of being the last in the row for 2011 - hehe, I don't know anything about it, but I saw the trailer and it took my curiosity not by chance :)

Reality: To give up your dreams or activity you always wanted to do or at least claimed to, because of the divorce of your parents, can happen only in rebellious world of teenagers. Miley Cyrus is the rebel and the two parents cannot help it. The storyline is cute and revolves around spending summer with your daddy (which you hate because he divorced your mom). Simple truth and simple deed that ruined a perfect childhood these two kids had. Now, the younger brother didn't know at that point what went on because he was too little. The older teen girl knows exactly and hates the guts out of her father. Unfortunately she's stuck for the summer.
The drift away from this plot comes in shape of William, cute guy from the neighbourhood, whose parents are filthy rich and all the girls want to get in his pants. All except Miley. Somehow in terms of Hollywood romantic comedy, obviously she gets the access and wins his heart. Vice versa, of course. We know what a perfect summer should feel like.
Some side stories, with turtles and watching their back because racoons are about to eat them, makes this piece really cute and watchable. No extras and no special effects, just getting over the spoilt parent relationship with the superturn at the discovery that dad has cancer and he's about to die. Which makes dad and daughter best friends again and brings back life to Miley Cyrus. Starts to make music again, separates herself from all she loves just to be with him in the last days. Cute, watchable, good plot and feelings. Well acted and well directed. More than average, less than perfect. A good choice for the last movie of the season.

My personal rate: 6,0 (I actually liked the romance, depicted, and the purpose, for which we all seek something to grow up and old with. The devastating relationship break between two people and the influence on the children)

The Last Song on IMDB

Dec 29, 2011

JFK, 1991

JFK, 1991
Director: Oliver Stone
Cast: Kevin Costner, Gary Oldman, Jack Lemmon

Stage: home TV selection

JFK in short:
Details the actions of New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison, who takes it upon himself to investigate the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in Dallas, Texas, in 1963. Garrison is extremely suspicious of the official story presented by the FBI, and what he already knows and what he subsequently learns lead him to suspect that there is more to the story than the public is being told.

Reality: The government for the people, by the people and of the people :) Is it really? Kevin Coster is a mega star in one of the best achievements to put in a light on the Kennedy's death and assasination. The state prosecutor follows numerous hints on what happened on that day and who is responsible for this, almost losing his job while doing it. I believe that this is one of Stone's triumph movies and the same goes for Costner - one of his best achievements in his career.

I am a fan of historical movies, as long as they depict some kind of reality. In this case, this is Stone's reality. Noone really knows what happened that day and who was really to be taken in front of the court. I doubt this is the movies' intention. I believe that the main idea here lies in the simple fact that we try to see who it is we vote for and who is the responsible person after the dawn. In this case, this was a dawn for american citizen, doubled because both brothers were killed. And there were many aspects to this case, as well as many people that really wanted to know who to blame and put him in front of the jury. However, as said, this is one of realities shown in JFK, however I believe it to be the most energic one, subtitled by true footage and films, made by passengers that day. So in this sense it serves historical facts and things known by public. I doubt it reveals something we didn't have access to, but for many people the facts shown here will be intriguing and difficult to face with.
The cast is brilliant, Costner definitely leaves his mark, as well as Gary Oldman. The scenes carefully chosen, the "honesty" shown so deeply it hurts your eyes sometimes. The side story about leaving everything you care to show your duties to your country.. well, in some sense, you get the idea of how it is to be married to a prosecutor. When he has his focus, he definitely has the focus on. And leaves everything behind, even if it turns on fire.

The piece is watchable and good one, even beyond that. If fan of history or if you are wondering about the happening around JFK's death, this is the place to be. Or to watch, to be exact.

My personal rate: 7,0 (a good, solid piece. A must watching for movie fans. )


Sherlock Holmes: A game of Shadows, 2011

Sherlock Holmes: A game of shadows,2011
Director: Guy Ritchie
Cast: Robert Downey Junior, Jude Law, Jared Harris

Stage: Home theatre

Sherlock in short:
Sherlock Holmes (Robert Downey, Jr.) and his longtime trusted associate, Doctor Watson (Jude Law), take on their arch-nemesis, Professor Moriarty (Jared Harris), with the help of Holmes's older brother Mycroft Holmes (Stephen Fry) and a gypsy named Sim (Noomi Rapace).

Preps: This is a hot cake in our theatre's oven. Especially because of my respect for Holmes I need to see it. However because of part one, I doubt I will like it.

Reality: Unfortunately I am correct. As I stated in my critic for part one, part two is a true example of a movie that doesn't have much to do with the figure designed and written about by Doyle. This Sherlock Holmes is a weird detective in Ritchie's eyes. I would expect a weird and somehow wacky enough movie to impress me by Ritchie. The problem is that I read all of Doyle's novels about Sherlock Holmes and I would love to see something like that series we were watching around 15 years ago.

As said, this piece is nothing like this. Combining action features from Matrix and similar movies, it takes us to Kill Bill like scenes, kung fu fighting and escaping bullets quicker than Tom Cruise in MI. A horrible mixture and horrible piece, if you are seeking for true Sherlock like the one depicted by Doyle.
However, if you are not, prepare for the mixture because it might impress you. I wasn't impressed, because I was looking for some true logic and mind games Sherlock Holmes was famous for. Instead, I got a lot of fighing, some gentlemen deeds and fear of love. Bljah. Ritchie was on something when shooting this. Or when reading about Sherlock Holmes. If you are trying to create a movie about a persona, why do it in such a weird style.. least to Holmes. The unfortunate deed for this critic is that I really adored those novels when I was a child. And am still fighting to see a good movie screening of this. Which Game of shadows definitely isn't. But you will find it intriguing if you aren't obsessed with the Doyle's figure.

My personal rate: 2,0 (despite the good movie quality this isn't really about Holmes. It's about Ritchie).

Sherlock on IMDB

Dec 27, 2011

Just My Luck, 2006

Just my luck, 2006
Director: Donald Petrie
Cast: Lindsey Lohan, Chris Pine

Just my luck in short:

In Manhattan, Ashley Albright is a lucky woman and very successful in the agency where she works. The clumsy Jake Hardin is an unlucky aspirant manager of the rock band McFly, who is unsuccessfully trying to contact the entrepreneur Damon Phillips to promote his band. When Ashley meets Jake in a masquerade party, they kiss each other, swapping her fortune with his bad luck.

Stage: home TV selection, late night.

Preps: Hm, just saw it on the TV and I am curious. It has a good beginning plot. Maybe I can cope with it despite Lindsay Lohan, which I am not a huge fan of.

: Hm, another dissappointment. I can't believe how many movies that even don't reach minimum to be able to digest I am watching lately. And I don't suppose it's higher standards I am seeking for. I just think I am out of luck, as this movie implies.
You cannot go through a world like Lindsay in this piece and for sure you cannot go like Chris Pine does. It's simply unbelievable and I cannot cope with this virtual reality, for it's nothing else I see in this piece. I could imagine this to be a book or imaginary world. There's absolutely nothing good or positive I can claim about this piece, as it seems immature, disrespectful to the audience (or its intelligence) and not funny at all. This comes into romantic comedies genre, yet it's quite the opposite. The jokes aren't funny, but plane stupid. The main cast is built in a way you cannot even pretend to fall into the imaginary world they are depicting. Where in the world did the director get Lindsay's boss in the movie? A tweet, what it is, as Monty Phython would say. No way you get such a job and no way so many stupid icons are working with you.
Argh. Again, I don't like the piece even up to a level I could watch it until its end. I claim it is not worth of your time and efforts. The music sucks, the actors also. The scenes are unimaginary and not witty at all. The love that the two main actors seem to develop in the process, seems lame and not real. There is absolutely no energy in this movie. And there isn't a word more that needs to be said.

My personal rate:0 (bljah! Another one bites the dust)

Just my luck on IMDB

New Year's Eve, 2011

New Year's Eve, 2011
Director: Garry Marshall
Cast: Sarah Jessica Parker, Ashton Kutcher, Naomi Watts, Robert De Niro, Zach Efron, Hale Berry, Alyssa Milano, Jessica Biel,.. (a bunch of famous actors)

Stage: Local theatre, Christmas show in the morning

New Year's eve in short: The lives of several couples and singles in New York intertwine over the course of New Year's Eve.

Preps: wow, a bunch of famous people starring in this piece. Need to see it badly. But the critics are very bad for this piece. Well, couldn't hurt. Have seen several really shitty ones lately.

Reality: Wow. Every scene with some actor I admire or like to watch. For this, this piece is worth seeing. Like in Love actually. Or maybe Notting Hill. Or some other romantic comedies. Around NY you have them standing in a line, trying to get our attention. As said, the winner for the last five years is definitely Letters to Saint Nicholas. A touching movie you should definitely see.
But this one.. what was the budget for this piece? I imagine that the actors must have played for peanuts, because it's quite impossible to budget such a movie. It is definitely fun to see them all assembled, working in specific relationship issues (competition for the first baby, hating the idea of NY and falling in love in an elevator, trying to get your ex to forgive you for leaving her /escaping).. you cannot get fed up with these scenes, but it's not the movie itself that draggs the attention, it's the famous crew, I am sure.
The dialogues get sometimes really intelligent, otherwise, they cannot get rid of cliches and stories about xmas and NY and main resolutions you could make to make it count.
The drop of the ball is simply beautiful. Never knew this was such a big deal there. After seeing this movie, I want to see it live sometimes. This means the movie can be inspiring for some deeds in the future. And I strongly believe it to be a commercial to go and visit NY city. It is really obvious and I am sure that their economy will get a positive feed in the next months or in the next new year to come. And my personal wish.. I would sometimes like to be in charge of something as big as the drop of the ball for NY in NY city. I adore the position and the woman behind it. I think I could cope also with the challenge. In this sense I find the movie inspiring. Plus, a fun to watch. I especially laugh at the scenes and triviality of the baby homerun. Do they really get that amount of money? :) I would love to find out for real.

If you aren't burdened with the Xmas spirit, you will definitely enjoy the movie. It is fun to watch and pleasant to the eyes because of its crew. Plus, it has a positive philosophy: NY is about making piece with yourself. It's about finding forgiveness and a path for future, which doesn't carry burdens from the past. It's a period to reflect everything we wanted and got it and everything we wanted and didn't get it.

My personal rate: 6,0
(cute enough for this period. Plus, a parade of actors. Fun to watch. But don't worry about getting your mind overloaded. It's simple and plain)

New Year's eve on IMDB

Moneyball, 2011

Moneyball, 2011
Director: Bennet Miller
Cast: Brad Pitt, Robin Wright, Jonah Hill

: home theatre, late screening

Moneyball in short: Oakland A's GM Billy Beane is handicapped with the lowest salary constraint in baseball. If he ever wants to win the World Series, Billy must find a competitive advantage. Billy is about to turn baseball on its ear when he uses statistical data to analyze and place value on the players he picks for the team.

isn't this the one with Brad Pitt, hot cake in our theatres? I adore the act of Pitt and want to see this.

Reality: Hm. Sometimes being a good actor means obviously that you take on shitty roles. I am dissappointed. Up to this point, the main movie in this genre for me was Any Given Sunday, a good piece about cruelty of sports world with Cameron Diaz.
Now, this perticular piece touches the economy of each club involved and the drama that can derive from a simple fact: actors are a currency and they are of value as long as they can play. And each club makes assumptions, statistics and creates a perfect team up to the level it can afford. Unfortunately sometimes they don't have enough sponsors or money to buy the perfect team, so they fill the spots with less important, less capable actors. And this in whole creates a lot of dramatic effects along the season.
As audience, we enter this world with Brad Pitt, a game creator, trying or struggling to have figures working for him. A prepotentious leader, who takes advantage of economist that makes the analysis and serves the data at a glance.

Even though what I wrote so far, sounds inspiring, it is the mere admiration to the topic. The movie isn't nearly as intriguing as for instance Any Given Sunday or some other sport movies. Brad Pitt doesn't act as he is supposed to, the energy between the cast isn't established and the audience is left hungry behind the bars. Yes, a good insight, however, not delivered good enough. What the director was thinking, I don't have a clue. But I am sure that he wasn't fighting for the piece. It loses me after half an hour. Don't really recommend it at all, unless you are a huge fan of sports movies. In this case you will find it completely average. My opinion is below that.

My personal rate: 0
(do something else, if you aren't a true fan of sport movies)

Moneyball on IMDB

The Guard, 2011

The Guard, 2011
Director: John Michael McDonagh
Cast: Brendan Gleeson, Don Cheadle, Mark Strong

Stage: Home theatre

The guard in short: Sergeant Gerry Boyle is a small-town Irish cop with a confrontational personality, a subversive sense of humor, a dying mother, a fondness for prostitutes, and absolutely no interest whatsoever in the international cocaine-smuggling ring that has brought straight-laced FBI agent Wendell Everett to his door.

Preps: Another one waiting for my attention. But I don't have a clue what it's about.

Reality: One of the hardest time waiting to figure out what the movie is really about and why do I find it extremely underestimating to the audience (read: Stupid).
The scenes are wrong, the plot is really plain and the action we see is really trivial. Can I say anything good about this piece? I am trying very hard. Mocking Irish people in american cop world is .. well, I find it really lame. Drug busts are a worthy theme and comedies that revolve around them can be really strong. Or hard dramas. Well, this piece is neither of the both and even though I am struggling through the cast and its energy, I cannot bare it anymore. After 20 minutes, a shut down. I think it doesn't deserve your attention, or mine. I think it's a waste of time in more than one level. If we only had good quality dialogues, or scenes, or irony, or.. well, anything. A definite no no. How do these pieces even get the funding anyway, I wonder.

My personal rate: 0
(argh. Waste of time. Nothing in this piece to cherish or get familiar with. Skip it and do something better!)

The Guard on IMDB

Traktor, ljubezen in Rock'n'roll, 2008

Traktor, ljubezen in Rock'n'roll, 2008
Director: Branko Đurić
Cast: Tanja Ribič, Branko Đurić, Ludvik Bagari

Stage: Local theatre, late evening screening

Traktor in short:

The script of TRAKTOR, LJUBEZEN IN ROCK'N'ROLL was written on the basis of a novel entitled VANKOŠTANC whose main story unfolds in the north-eastern part of Slovenia, namely in the Prekmurje region situated on the border with Hungary, which is characterised by the Hungarian national minority, the unique blend of Hungarian and Slovene traditional culture, the Roma music and the famous Hungarian goulash called bograc, and where the division between the Slovene and Hungarian nations has been watered down through history.

The plot is set in the early 60s. Breza, a country boy from a godforsaken Prekmurje village, wishes to perform at the village festivities playing his electric guitar, but is faced with fierce competition in the form of a traditional Roma band entertaining the villagers by playing popular folk music. Nevertheless, his music seems to be the key to the heart of Silvija, a village beauty and the daughter of a wealthy gastarbeiter from Switzerland, who was sent home to find a healthy Slovene husband. However, the story of Breza and Silvija only marks the beginning of the plot whose main character is actually Düplin, an eccentric outsider, a deaf-and-dumb tramp or, as Breza's mother, the old Popovka, a farm owner and a fortune-teller also referred to as Strina, called him "a lad from a citrus producing country".

Preps: the hot cake in the oven. The notorious movie that couldn't get sponsors. And I am a huge fan of Đuro, who in this case also casts, not only directs. How good can it get?

Reality: Well, as seen several times, all great people in cinematography, directors in perticular, have their bad or worse moments. After seeing several Đurić masterpieces I am terribly dissappointed in this one. It's so average that I cannot believe it. I am now sure why he hasn't received sponsors (this is why we can see this in 2011 instead of 2008, when the movie was really made.). In any case, the plot is simple to follow. A simple guy with a dream wants to succeed as a rock star. Unfortunately, living in a small village around 70 corners (I mean really far far away land), doesn't give much of freedom in creating and can be quite limiting. In some sense, this was the case for most musicians around the world, however, in this perticular case it's really domestic. I believe that slovene audience will definitely show some patriotism in seeing this piece and will compare the historical belief they have (this derives from classes in junior high), with the screened reality.
I believe a great effort was made to copy genuine language and even as a slovenian I cannot say that they have done a great job, because I simply don't know and need to believe Đurić perspective or his side of the coin. There are several different versions of slovene language, in this case he chose the most abstract one. The one noone in Slovenia understands without subtitles. And in this suburban scene he pointed out the difficulty to survive and to grow personally. Because of preserving a life and trying on a farm, hardly possible.

The life as depicted must be like it was. It is breathtaking. And the philosophy of grabbing the first guy, that is willing to marry you, is simply devastating. In this sense, the movie is a perfect example of history shown on screen. But in the real sense, the energy between the actors, the witty scenes (are lacking!!), the lack of the next step that would make me alert the whole time while watching.. I am used of Đurić movies on the different level (higher) than the one shown here. And I am sure he could do a better job. Where is the conclusion in scenes? Where is the dramatic effect we are used to? Deriving from things he does best is perfectly shown in this piece. And I guess it proves one more time, that being a genious in cast and a genious in directing a movie, can turn into something quite average, when one wants to be both. So.. I don't recommend it, because it is more shallow than you would ever expect and below Branko's standard.

My personal rate: 5,0 (for the sake of slovenian audience, I mean that his true fans will see this, being a good piece or not. But to be fair, it's an average example of what I could have seen at home and not at the movies)

Traktor, ljubezen in rock'n'roll

Dec 25, 2011

The Debt, 2007

The Debt, 2007
Director: Assaf Bernstein
Cast: Gila Almagor, Yurij Chepurnov, Oleg Drach

The Debt in short:
The year is 1965. Rachel Brener is one of 3 young Mossad agents teem who caught "The Surgeon of Treblinca" - a Nazi monster who was never brought to trial in Israel. The official reason was that he has committed suicide as a prisoner while being held by his Israeli captive (kiddenappers) in a safe house somewhere in Europe. Today, 35 years after the well communicated suicide story of the monster, a small article appears in a local unimportant paper in a small town in central Europe. Surprisingly the Surgeon is alive and is willing to admit his crimes against the human race and especially the Jews. The 3 older x Mossad agents who are in their late 60th became aware to this unfortunate threatening knowledge. The fact was that the "Surgeon" managed to escape from his guards- our 3 agents by wounding the woman who was not alert enough. Now that the old story came up to live again in a completely different version..

Preps: One in the oven, waiting for my attention. Why not on Christmas eve?

Hm. Tuff subject for xmas eve, definitely. The plot is simple and repeating, in sense we have seen this on several occasions. I actually like movies about hunting down war criminals, exposing their crimes and having them punished. This plot is similar to thousands. The crimes commited in a "lager" - between the war, to children, women, men - especially doctors played an important role in this - well, the hunt for doctor begins on two separate time zones. One back in 1965, one in present time. This shows also the fine structuring of the problem and the movie as we grow into the story. Present time, where we have old people remorsing the lie they made ages ago. And past time, where we have after war theme, after war feelings and the urge to chase down people that hurt people the punishers knew or were related to. In this sense, a mother, the complete family. The squad, being sent to chase down the criminal, isn't really convincing. I am not sure about the actual karma in 1965, however I suspect it wasn't as harsh as in actual war. The depicted actions show the same stigma as in the war itself. Was it really as hard to be normal and to act normal two decades later? When thinking, the squad was really young when the crimes were commited, so they cannot really remember a lot, but are acting upon stories.

Nevertheless, the movie does somehow find my deeper passion for these kinds of movies, but isn't one of the better ones I have seen on the topic. It is decent enough that I try to watch it by its end, especially because I am wondering what the real story was. However, I think it could be more shocking. What is shocking about some people killing a murderer because he killed so many people? I just don't see the drama and the true value of their hiding. The whole world was chasing criminals at that stage. Why would this be such a secret - I am not saying this in terms of taking justice in your own hands. This obviously is against the law and I am sure that it was the same case back then. But it was 2 decades after the war and I don't see the real logic. Therefore I judge this movie not to be very convincing. They weren't like Anne Frank, that needed the hidden place not to be executed.

Anyhow, for me to believe the facts shown in the movie, I could use some movie background that this piece isn't showing. I know from historical point, that the time was wacky and all people were tense, so I can believe it from common sense and common educational point of view. However, how about making some of this points in the movie? General audience doesn't have a historical (deep) background. And these sorts of movies are supposed to teach us and make sure these actions don't happen again. This perticular piece isn't convincing at all. And no real energy between the actors.

My personal rate: 5,0 (well the topic is definitely intriguing. However the delivery fails on more than one step. Still, if you are a fan of post naci hunting movies, you might enjoy even this one)

Debt on IMDB

Doc Hollywood, 1991

Doc Hollywood, 1991
Director: Michael Caton-Jones
Cast: Michael J. Fox, Julie Warner, Bernard Hughes

Stage: home theatre, just before Christmas and midnight carols

Doc Hollywood in short:
Benjamin Stone is a young doctor driving to L.A where he was offered a new job as a plastic surgeon in Beverly Hills. He gets off the highway to avoid a traffic jam, but gets lost and ends up crashing into a fence in the small town of Grady. He is sentenced to 32 hrs of community service at the local hospital. All he wants is to serve the sentence and get moving, but gradually the locals become attached to the new doctor, and he falls for the pretty ambulance driver, Lou. Will he leave?

Preps: wow, haven't seen this piece in ages, I used to adore this movie. Finally, on TV. Let's see if I am dazzling even now.

Well, obviously the movie industry has made several important steps forward. In this sense, movies that used to sparkle our attention around beginning of nineties (Ghost, Pretty woman, even Doc Hollywood in this sense) are like oldies goldies in terms of music: you need to step a step back in time and swallow the feeling that was then - with doing that you can enjoy these movies like in the old days.

Doc Hollywood is one of the movies that breaks the big promise in small particles that make you wonder about the real worth of the big promise. To the people in Titanic USA was the big promise, the promise of a better life. To Doc Hollywood, living in big cities as a successful surgeon, was the promise of a better life. However, on the path to the heaven he discovers that in fact he gives a damn about small, trivial things in life and begins to doubt his decisions or his overall goals. The conversion from a big city man into the small town guy is expected, still cute. The focus in the movie is on family, small things that matter in life, knowing people that are close to you as opposed to relations in bigger cities where you definitely don't know the neighbours. You could call it some kind of catholic marketing in this movie, despite the fact that religion isn't mentioned anywhere. However the values that are praised and the reason why he changes his mind, are pretty catholic. In this sense, you start thinking if it is what you want something like this. To shoot the pigeons when you could be satisfied to your bones with the sparrows that are near you.

I think that if someone thinks big and really really really wants it, that person will find a path and no other things can cross the road there. I admit that you need to spend some time living like this in order to like it. Northern exposure is an example, drawn from series world, on the same topic. The punishment (being forced to live in a small community with small minded persons as you see them) becomes the biggest reward.

I still like the movie. A good relaxing example for big thinking. Nice music, nice dialogues, witty scenes. And some irony hidden along the way. Still worth watching!

My personal rate:6,0
(more than decen fun, obviously you need to set your mindset back 20 years and you will enjoy it a lot!)

Doc Hollywood on IMDB

Dec 24, 2011

The Thing, 2011

The Thing, 2011
Director: Matthijs van Heijningen Jr.
Cast:Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Joel Edgerton, Ulrich Thomsen

The Thing in short: At an Antarctica research site, the discovery of an alien craft leads to a confrontation between graduate student Kate Lloyd and scientist Dr. Sander Halvorson. While Dr. Halvorson keeps to his research, Kate partners with Sam Carter, a helicopter pilot, to pursue the alien life form.

Stage: home theatre, Christmas eve.

Preps: None in perticular. But I have heard roomers about this piece and I want to test them.

Reality: Well, it's a shitty movie, to be very direct in my first sentence. Where do the directors that want to shoot a movie about aliens come up with these weird ideas? Ok, you find a lifeform in northern pole. After 10000 years caught in the ice it is still alive. Right. Ok, I swallow this somehow. How about being able to replicate in some kind of grose form of people so we can watch really yukky scenes that don't make any perticular sense or aren't something you want or need to see at any point in your life.

Disgusting movie, showing a fight for survival of some scientists that came to the pole to experience some live scientific things, instead they get caught in a trap and killed. Bla Bla Bla. We have seen it all. The only difference is, that the woman, serving as a paleontologist or something combined with biological/surgeon scientific treasure, is very persistent and doesn't get killed in the first scene. Apart from that, not a movie worth your attention or time. The music sucks, the scenes are unimaginative, the plot is stupid and the actors are very average or even below that level .. The least I say about this, the better. Don't watch it. A definite waste of time. I am more than unhappy having chosen this piece for my christmas evening.

My personal rate: 0 (bljak. No extra comment needed).

Thing on IMDB

Dec 18, 2011

Father's day, 1997

Father's day, 1997
Director: Ivan Reitman
Cast: Billy Cristal, Robin Williams, Julia Louis-Dreyfuss

Father's day in short:
Jack Lawrence is a smart allec lawyer who is one day visited by an ex-girlfriend who tells him her kid was his. Enter Dale Putley, a depressed goofball who is also a writer, meets with the same ex-girlfriend who tells him her kid is his. One day Jack and Dale meet and discover what had happened: they've been told the same story and now there's a question of who the real father is. They learn their son is following a rock band called Sugar Ray around. So Jack and Dale hit the road to Sacremento and find their drunk, lovestruck son. Soon after they bring him back to their hotel room, their son escapes and Jack and Dale must use teamwork to find him again, bring him home, and find out which one of them is the real father.

Just at home, doing nothing and this is on TV. Let's check it out

Sometimes our televisions should carefully go through the programme they are making for the viewers. I mean, how stupid can the audience get, being submerged to sh... movies like that? My conscious wakens and yells in dispair.

Ok, starting with the cast. I have seen both protagonists, Williams and Crystal, in better shape and definitely better movies. Here they are a clown version of themselves. Not appettite luring.
Secondly, the storyline. I mean, really? Two persons, trying to find the son they don't want to have in the first place and falling in the arms of another lovely woman, filled with lies and betrayal. Seriously?
Now, what are we seeking in this piece? I think it belongs to the irony of the past actions. I the sense, that we really must think about what it is that we are doing with our time and what are the actions we might regret in the future. It's not normal to react the way these two men react. You can see it in some "Everybody loves Mary" sense, but still. I hate the resemblance. It is not true that a possible father will go and chase a possible son just for the sake of being with him or trying to get his attention.

The chase is a mixture of a roadtrip and some lame movies on the topic. This piece is trying to be what it's not and it's killing it. Where is the creativity? Why don't you make the best out of these two fine actors? Again, I cannot bare to watch it up to its end and I lose the grip at the second quarter. Lost, erased, gone. Forgot about it already.

My personal rate: 0 (argh. Another waste of time. unfortunately. Don't make it a waste of time for you :)

Father's day

American Dreamz, 2006

American Dreamz, 2006
Director:Paul Weitz
Cast: Dennis Quaid, Hugh Grant, Mandy Moore

Stage: Home TV selection

American Dreamz in short: The new season of "American Dreamz," the wildly popular television singing contest, has captured the country's attention, as the competition looks to be between a young Midwestern gal (Moore) and a showtunes-loving young man from Orange County (Golzari). Recently awakened President Staton (Quaid) even wants in on the craze, as he signs up for the potential explosive season finale.

Preps: None in perticular, I am just home and have some time to spare.

Well.. pathetic. Is the director so lame that he thinks there could be a case where a president of US wouldn't function because of a TV show? Or that he could really hide away? Really? I mean, Really?

This is a classic example of a movie that wants to be serious and funny at the same time. You don't get to be a drama and a comedy at the same time. You don't use actors that have a giant role in comedies, and in this case Grant does his job decently. Not if you want a drama about the president.
Oh, wait. Or was it the first intention of the piece to make fun out of president and his role? This reality isn't really funny, nor entertaining, nor dramatic, nor sad. Just plain stupid. Nowhere you could have a president running through the newspapers instead of going to the crowds and shaking their hands, at least.

Hugh Grant in the role of the TV leader isn't as bad as everything else is. Well, I don't admire his role. I just love the man in dramas and romantic comedies. This, trying to be a mixture of both, fails and lets me down completely. Dennis Quaid, as far as I am concerned, is one of greater names in late nineties. But here, he is a complete disaster. I don't buy even a minute of his cast. As if he didn't know the role (or the scenario). Or was it on purpose?

No strings attached. I stop watching. I cannot bare it.

My personal rate: 1,0 (yuk. skip it. If you are a fan of TV shows, maybe. But on the second hand.. No. skip it!)

American Dreamz on IMDB

The Sphere, 1998

The Sphere, 1998
Director: Barry Levinson
Cast: Dustin Hoffmann, Sharon Stone, Samuel L. Jackson

Stage: Home theatre, TV selection on a fine Sunday night

The Sphere in short: 1000 feet below the ocean, navy divers discover an object half-a-mile long. A crack team of scientists are deployed to the site in Deepsea Habitats. What they find boggles the mind as they discover a perfect metal sphere. What is the secret behind the sphere? Will they survive the mysterious 'manifestations'? Who or what is creating these? They may never live to find out.

I have seen this a few times. Every time it gives me shivers. A splendid piece.

One of last decade's better pieces on extraterrestrial life, time journeys, subconscious fear of machines that can manipulate our mind, journey with scientists (that most of us only dream of).. well, this piece does have a lot of things going for him. In addition, it has a fabulous act, witty scenes and creative dialogues. A good music accompanying most of dreadful and scary scenes. A lot of logic you cannot convey and for this reason you just accept the facts as the scientists introduce them.

Speaking with Jerry, speaking with your subconscious, can be freaky. Being online with an alien mind, speaking to it through the computer, going into spheres, coming out as a complete wacko.. the line doesn't end. And you are thrown into a river that.

"I make a journey. You make a journey. We make a journey together." One of the things that Jerry makes clear to the crew. The point where you wonder if you are speaking to a child or is the child underestimating the speaking party on the deck. He's happy, one of the things that psychologist doesn't appreciate (Dustin Hoffmann in one of his good roles). What if the speaker becomes angry? Well, we see this happen in many different aspects. A lot of weird things happen on the deck, all of them trying to give us the lesson that sometimes we shouldn't poke our nose where it doesn't belong. But this is also the reason we are making progress in many fields, science included. If we all minded our own business, we couldn't progress anywhere. Here the team is prosecuted for doing so and biting their own meat from their bodies (between the members) as they are trying to fight the freaky opponent. How to fight something you don't know or aren't aware of how to fight? Learn in the movie. And find some great scenes along the way, like the one with jello fish and dying because of it.

My personal rate: 8,0
( You will love the fright you will get several times along the way. And the psychological effect of pure deduction procedures done by brilliant mathematician. A lot of things to find in the piece for you. If you are a sci-fi fan, don't miss it!)

The Sphere on IMDB

What's your number, 2011

What's your number, 2011
Director: Mark Mylod
Cast: Anna Faris, Chris Evans, Ari Graynor

Stage: Home theatre

What's your number in short:
Ally is a woman who has many ex-boyfriends who turned out to be losers. Now she believes that she can't find a good guy. But when she runs into one of her exes who is now a 'Prince Charming', she decides to look up all of her exes to see if any of them have changed for the better. And when she has trouble locating them, she asks her neighbor Colin, who sleeps with women every night and sneaks out the morning after to avoid talking to them, to help her.

Preps: Well, another one bites the dust. Stuck in my library, aiming for my attention.

Reality: A huge dissappointment. It's a classic bimbo movie, with a cute blonde, cute eyelashes and this is it. You cannot base your movie upon a cute blonde, hello world! Her tracking of the ex sexual relationships in aim to make it under number 20 just because she saw it in the horoscope that it means she would be perceived a tramp.. well it doesn't ring any specific bells and it doesn't drag my attention. Unfortunately I stay put and watch it a very very long run. It's unimaginative, the dialogues are awful. We are sick of movies that underestimate the audience's intelligence. This is definitely one of them. A bunch of useless talks, subjects that are merely a mirror image of a horoscope of the day. Blyah. You cannot be serious about the plot. It's juvenile and not worthy of the big screen. And the cast is awful, scenes are really stupid and hard to watch. My movie heart sheds a tear as I dislike it up to such extent.

No use. I erase the damn thing. What's my number? Zero, for sure.

My personal rate: 0,0 (eh. Use your time better. This is nothing you can learn from or even have fun. I hated it and found it stupid).

What's your number on IMDB

50 Dead Men Walking, 2008

50 Dead Men Walking, 2008
Director: Kari Skogland
Cast: Ben Kingsley, Jim Sturgess, Kevin Zegers

Stage: Home TV selection, late Saturday night

50 dead men in short: Based on Martin McGartland's shocking real life story. Martin is a young lad from west Belfast in the late 1980s who is recruited by the British Police to spy on the IRA. He works his way up the ranks as a volunteer for the IRA whilst feeding information to his British handler and saving lives in the process.

Well, I don't have any. Neither have I heard about the piece, nor I am aware what it's about. But I can see from the beginning it's going to be a hard one, full of reality in its hardest shape.

Reality: Well, this isn't a tough call. The piece shocks you in many ways. We still live in our cocoons all around the world. And think that wars are reserved for places far away. No way they can influence our lives and they are reserved for special missions.
Dream on. This piece was made to clear your mind. The war is as near as Ireland, you can find it in your own country. Making fun out of native citizen, humiliating people, having rasists all around you. I think you can perfectly suit the piece to every country in the EU, yet alone in the world. It is just the simple fact that it's more obvious in Ireland. The war with IRA and british people staying there is just something you can close your eyes from, but cannot deny. Are you a free citizen if you are living in a country you were born in and want to get work, get a life, get family and succeed? It seems that among "equal" some nations are more equal than the others. And in this sense this piece can tore your heart in two parts.
The main protagonist fights two battles, one of his heart (who are you true to) and the other one of survival (yes, human beings normally have the desire to survive). Which one is more important? Is it more cool to die for things you believe in or to live and pretend you don't care? Much simpler puzzle, if you have a family, in this sense you will move towards preserving it from harm. And the movie is filled with choices. To be a spy or to die and be hungry.. Tough dilemmas, the main actor fights all his life and saves lives in his deeds, although not being proud of himself. Just wanting to survive and make the best out of opportunities he das.
Is it good he was doing or was it evil? I will leave the judgement to the audience. I think that after seeing this you will be happy if you have the luck to lie in a country that doesn't fight such terror as it is still present in Ireland. I would like to have a safe feeling about my country and places I go to see. I am happy that noone chases me on our streets just because I am of wrong nation. I am aware there aren't many people as lucky as me.

The piece in its second stage reveals many traumas the young man has. It doesn't serve us the music, the script, just the raw story. Taken upon a true story, it can reveal humbleness in your heart and evil towards unjustice, like we see it here. Pure, red, rebellious.

My personal rate: 6,0 (Don't watch it if you have a bad stomach. It could hurt your sleep as you go along with it)

50 Dead men walking on IMDB

The Sunset Limited, 2011

The Sunset Limited, 2011
Director: Tommy Lee Jones
Cast: Samuel L Jackson, Tommy Lee Jones

Stage: Home Theatre

The Sunset Limited in short: Two men in an apartment with their opposing beliefs.

Preps: Another one dusty in my closet, waiting for my attention

For a fact, it is really hard to keep the attention of the viewer if you are locked on one static place and you need to keep the main cast there. We have seen it in The Phone booth, a pure example of what efforts it takes to make this kind of movie work.
Now, this piece has been designed only for TV's. I wonder why. Shy to get on the big screen? TV span of attention of viewers is even lower. We can use every escape possible to get to the fridge. So I guess in my logic it is even harder to make me watch.
But I confess. I have watched it from the beginning to the very last second. The dialogues are extremely good. The words spoken are on a higher level than average. You need to really understand english to be able to really follow. And you can even learn as you go along. How many movies do you know that do that? I know only a few. This is definitely one of them.
I admit, I didn't have a f. idea what the movie was about in the first 15 minutes. I was thinking that maybe the movie isn't trying to reach me or something. Or I wasn't trying hard enough. No, the truth is the opposite. You learn as you go along the movie. The obvious, the saving of a guy, trying to kill himself, becomes something far distant in the past. The only thing you need to know is - have you ever thought about your virtues, your beliefs, your arguments for it? Well.. if you have or haven't, you are in for a treat. As if I would be watching our elections and two complete opposites were trying to pursuade me about their beliefs.

You will think about way you look at the world for your own soul. What is it that you are trying to seek and what is it that you want to be left behind you. Does hell exist, does heaven? Who would you like to meet after you go and is it true that you would really want to meet someone, once you think about it?

Lots of good questions. Lots of philosophy. This movie doesn't have anything more, but the script is powerful and it doesn't need anything else. The two main protagonists act as if their lives would depend on it. I love it, the piece, the energy, the actors. I need to watch it again. Definitely!

My personal rate: 7,0 (truly extreme beliefs and beautiful dialogues, filled with right arguments and right placements of high rank words)

The Sunset on IMDB

Dec 17, 2011

The perfect Storm, 2000

The perfect storm, 2011
Director:Wolfgang Petersen
Cast: Mark Wahlberg, George Clooney, Diane Lane

Stage: home theatre, late afternoon Saturday movie

The perfect storm in short: In October 1991, a confluence of weather conditions combined to form a killer storm in the North Atlantic. Caught in the storm was the sword-fishing boat Andrea Gail. Magnificent foreshadowing and anticipation fill this true-life drama while minute details of the fishing boats, their gear and the weather are juxtaposed with the sea adventure.

Preps: A must see if it's on TV, I have seen in in the movies and loved it. It's just worth seeing what are the values and needs you are willing to try competing with death, for.

Reality: One of my favourite's Clooney parts. I just love him here, because I imagine that in real life he must be as stubborn and rough as his character is in the piece. The real life for fishing village, fishing for life and hardly make a living (or not at all) if you aren't lucky in the season... it will make your heart cry.
The real fight begins if the weather isn't nice and this is the unpredictable part in this story which makes a difference between life and death. If we are truly prudent and posh towards nature, this piece will make you respect it again. It clearly shows the line where you need to surrender and where you need to bow in front of the nature, as we are towards the big organism like ants and it will tread all over us if we disrespect it.

The hunt we are seeing here as the main story (fishing) happens up to this level only because it's a difference whether some families will make it or not. Live or not. They need money to do it so they risk the lives of fishermen. In this case it doesn't happen. In some cases it does. A strange lottery to be playing. And definitely makes me not want to be in similar situation ever.

You will respect the scenes that were pulled obviously off in the studio, because they are naturally embedded and you think it's the real nature. And you will cry for the sake of lost love.

My personal rate: 6,0 (the best perception of the storms, combined with a breathtaking race for life)

The perfoect storm on IMDB

One Day, 2011

One Day, 2011
Director: Lone Scherfig
Cast: Anne Hathaway, Jim Sturgess, Patricia Clarkson

Stage: home theatre, late Friday with nothing more important or nice on my mind

One Day in short. Emma and Dexter meet on the night of their university graduation. We see them every year on the anniversary of that date - July 15th. Emma is smart but success doesn't come quickly for her, whereas for Dexter, success and women come very easily. Through the years they grow apart as their lives take different directions and they meet other people. But as they grow apart from those other people and their lives start taking opposite directions again, Emma and Dexter find that they belong with each other.

Preps: None. But I wanted to see this at the movies, however I was too late.

Reality: This movie is filled with real life experience and sadness. If by any chance you can impersonate yourself into a similar situation, similar position, you will find the blood freezing in your veins. Can two people search for each other their complete lives? How about seeking for inappropriate moments in one's life? This movie is packed with them.

A pair has a relationship, which starts off with a fling, through friendship and best friends level. They even go on a vacation, yet they don't get seriously involved. One gets married, the other gets married, they both get divorced. And somewhere along the line, their paths cross in the most desireable way from viewer's perspective, obviously better late than never, they get involved. And a couple. And want a white fence house with kids. Up to that point you can see numerous occasions on which they should have stayed in the moment, become a couple, but they simply don't. And it could drive you crazy - after a while you are certain that they will be friends and that's it.

So how long are you ready to wait and hope? And how many times can you wake your feelings again? This movie is about it. I strongly believe that we have our soulmates and that we aren't in the right timing every time we interact. Maybe two soulmates must go apart in order to become stronger in another period of their lives.

The movie is equipped with touchy scenes, good dialoges and excellent cast. I just adore the way the director transforms the two in their different lifestages. The assimilation of their complete life experience and their personal lives is extraordinary and much above average that I would expect from this type of movie. I love the music and I love the main cast.

The side stories cannot influence the mainstream of events we are seeing. The unsatisfied relationships with parents, friends and all the people that surround the main actors. How to escape the relationship you don't want to be in for the obvious reason - being in love with your soulmate becomes main charma in the movie. And how briefly it is, the awakening, so sadly torn apart by accident. Truly broke my heart.

My personal rate: 8,0
( a solid romantic piece, a good drama with lots of twists. And it will make sure you will want to seize the day)

One Day on IMDB

Dec 11, 2011

The Bridges of Madison County, 1995

The Bridges of Madison County, 1995
Director: Clint Eastwood
Cast: Clint Eastwood, Meryl Streep, Annie Corley

Stage: TV selection on my home TV, Sunday night

The Bridges in short:The path of Francesca Johnson's future seems destined when an unexpected fork in the road causes her to question everything she had come to expect from life. While her husband and children are away at the Illinois state fair in the summer of 1965, Robert Kincaid happens turn into the Johnson farm and asks Francesca for directions to Roseman Bridge. Francesca later learns that he was in Iowa on assignment from National Geographic magazine. She is reluctant seeing that he's a complete stranger and then she agrees to show him to the bridges and gradually she talks about her life from being a war-bride from Italy which sets the pace for this bittersweet and all-too-brief romance of her life. Through the pain of separation from her secret love and the stark isolation she feels as the details of her life consume her, she writes her thoughts of the four-day love affair which took up three journals..

Preps: A good piece I have seen for several times and I love to see it again and again. Eastwood is my mantra.


This is one of the most beautiful and most sad love stories of all times, in my opinion. It's all about making decisions and to follow your true love (or what you would like it to be) or not. Leave your life behind, along with your kids and a husband, or not. Blame the new guy for coming all the time you are with him or make yourself happy. Is it really that you would like to make yourself happy, is another question.

There are several perspectives, from which you can observe this particular piece. One of them is the straightforward one - a guy walks in a semi dead marriage and makes a revelation with Francesca. To himself and to her. And after four days they split and never get over it. The idea in this scenario is that she leaves the love to waltz away not knowing what would happen if it happened at all.

The irony is in the fact that most relationships start off like this, like a rocket and it's later that we figure we were living a bit in the clouds (or a lot in the clouds). And if those two really matched as it seems in the movie, it would work. What if they didn't - little they knew about each other and what it would be like living together.
Still, she was willing to escape for a brief moment and would leave it all behind. I think that up to some point Eastwood would have persuaded her to go with him, if he was a bit more insisting on this.
It's a good way to think about love and a disaster to your heart if you can impersonate yourself inside the story, if you ever loved someone and thought it would be it and yet, let it slip away. Regrets is what we all have for bigger or smaller things, sometimes they seem life important.

This is one of more romantic dramas I have ever seen on screen. A beautiful cast with Streep and Eastwood, making their energies fly away in the clouds and bringing the essence of love we are all seeking to the screen. However, if your momental status of love is a disaster, this movie could enhance the depression you are having. And vice versa.

Beautiful scenery, scenes beyond erotic, so sexually pleasing it is a pleasure to watch it. Dialogues are witty and intelligent. I adore watching the two chat about things.

This is one of the more remarkable ideas Eastwood brings to the table at the first dinner:
"I don't think obsessions have reasons. This is why they are called obsessions."

I adore it, from the beginning to its end. In many ways it makes me cry. And in many others, it makes me dream away.

My personal rate: 8,5
(a good romance, it will make you think about your virtues and things you seek in life and love).

Bridges on IMDB

Dec 8, 2011

London Boulevard, 2010

London Boulevard, 2010
Director: William Monahan
Cast: Colin Farrell, Keira Knightley

Stage: Home theatre, late night showing

London Boulevard in short:
Mitchel ('Colin Farrell' ) just got out of jail and wants to stay legitimate but his friends involved in the messy London underground fear him and wants him to join them again but Mitchel tries his best to stay away. He gets himself a job as a bodyguard for a retired actress Charlotte (Keira Knightley) who is still hot news for the paparazzi. Mitchell, through his friend Billy eventually meets the underground Don by the name of Gant (Ray Winstone) who wants Mitch to work for him because of Mitch's reputations. While working together Mitch and Charlotte fall in love. Gant asks Billy to get the guy who sent Mitch to jail but it turns out to be the wrong one, Gant kills the guy in front of Mitch and lets Mitch know that he has to work for him now that Mitch has seen him commit the murder but Mitch refuses. Gant keeps trying to force Mitch to his side promising him good ranks.

Preps: I don't know what it's about. Haven't seen or heard about it. And I mean anything. So what's left for me is the feeling it's going to be a good one.

Reality: Well, a decent action afterall. It's a bit of a mixture and I think the director couldn't decide whether to have a good action, a good drama or to show some romance. So he made a decent mix of everything. The bad thing about mixes is that after a while you lose taste. So trying to please all the tastes leads you to average level. Unfortunately this movie is (stays) on average level. So we have a frightened and a bit looney actress, desperately seeking for her Avenger. This one comes in shape of Farrell, a beautiful ex con. Obviously they will fall under the sheets, the question that remains is when and if some of the luring reporters might catch them inbetween.
But we have also a figure of a drunk drugged monkey in shape of her regular guardian. Throughout the movie I am not sure how this figure entered the actress's life and what role in perticular can he play. Because he looks as if he ran out of Monty Phython and most certainly doesn't belong in the picture.
The action is good, but only as it runs in paralel and cannot really reveal it's hurt to the viewer. I mean, the deeds are mean but the whole picture when I look at it from a distance is a bit annoying. Also doesn't really fit. The only connection is that the people trying to get into the actresses life are thieves and ex con is the perfect choice if you want to get inside. Nevertheless, being Lock, Stock and Two smoking barrels and Notting Hill at the same time, hurts the overall feeling one has when watching the movie. No doubt that Farrell has The Looks, but you know, he can act, too. So give him the bloody scenario he can actually show it to us. We don't want to just watch his body, with all do respect. I would love some good dialogues and some music, maybe some creative scenery, etc.

All in all, you won't be dissappointed. But you will look at it as you would look at a decent meal. Nothing revealing, but still satisfactory.

My personal rating: 6,0 (average, yet better than most of the ones I have seen in the last 2 weeks).

London Boulevard on IMDB

Blitz, 2011

Blitz, 2011
Director: Elliot Lester
Cast: Jason Statham, Luke Evans, Aidan Gillen

Stage: home theatre :)

Blitz in short: Detective Sergeant Tom Brant who is dispatched to take down a serial killer hell bent on killing off the police force one by one. "The Blitz" manages to slip through the grasp of Tom every time, and with the precious lives of his colleagues diminishing one by one, Tom is led to the question: if we can't protect our own, then what good are we?

Preps: Ahm, nothing in perticular. I am not aware of the content, nor cast. One of those waiting on the to do list.

Reality: Well, it's one of those movies that tries to be intelligent, yet witty at the same time. Because of Statham, it would be the least I would expect. I admire Statham a great deal and I am anxious to see the piece.
The more I watch it, the more dissappointed I get. The crew seems disorientated, they don't seem to cling together, not singing the same tune or something. I am not sure. But the piece doesn't get to my heart and I am more and more inclined not to watch it anymore. I cannot believe my luck, because it's not the only movie in my mind this evening that has the same effect on me. The story isn't convincing, I feel it's been abused and that this piece doesn't make a contribution to the genre. If I look from the perspective of scenarist, I even get angry. Not clear dialogues, words put in just for the sake that someone says something. Bljak. I don't hesitate. Not my kind of music. Delete.

My personal rate: 1,0
(I didn't find nothing exceptional inside, nor the reason to watch it after a half).

Blitz on IMDB

Dec 3, 2011

Life as we know it, 2010

Life as we know it, 2010
Director: Greg Berlanti
Cast: Katherine Heigl,Josh Duhamel, Josh Lucas

Stage: home theatre

Life as we know it in short: Holly and Eric were set up on a blind date by their friends, Peter and Allison who are married. After Peter and Allison are killed in an accident, they learn that they have been named as the guardians to Peter and Allison's daughter, Sophie. So they move into their house and try their best to honor their friends' wishes. But raising a child puts a crimp on their style and they don't exactly get along.

Preps: None in perticular. Not aware of anything, haven't seen it at the movies and do not know who is the actor. So I am in for a surprise.

Reality: Wow, a surprise indeed. A cute start, having a perfect family with usual affairs and troubles. It gets complicated as the parents get killed in an accident. And the trivial question - who will take care of the child, gets solved in the most unusual way. I would never expect of any parents to live the child to their best friends for the simple reason, that they cannot stand each other.
Now the funny element in the piece derives from living under the same roof with the person you are obliged to just because your friends requested this as their last wish. So you want to respect that and get over it.
The problem here is not only social (the taking care of the child, which is obvious), but is more like this - can you get over your feelings for a person you hate and really not just pretend that you can get along in the same household? A philosophical cliche, I might say, but in this piece distributed in the most funny way possible. The scenes somehow remind of the better ones from Three men and a little baby /(the french version)/ or What happens in Vegas. I mean really funny scenes you cannot escape with having two persons not knowing how to take care of a baby and a baby in one scene. Entertaining, even more.
The other cliche we cannot escape is that opposites attract. It's pretty clear that one way or another the two main actors are going to get involved, the only remaining question is, if it's just having sex or something more. Since we are in Hollywood pack, it's quite clear it's going to be the second. Of course not without some complications, but still, the second choice.
The good thing about the movie is that it reminds us that having kids isn't just peaches and sweet cream. It's also the other way. And on our paths some mean things can happen to us. Maybe worth considering, what if, every now and then. The piece is more than average and Heigl has this good chemistry she passes in this type of movies. Really lovely to watch and I enjoyed the ride all along the way.

My personal rate: 8,0 ( a cute comedy, you will find a lot of scenes amusing and you will find the complete piece relaxing)

Life as we know it on IMDB

Mars Attacks, 1996

Mars Attacks, 1996
Director: Tim Burton
Cast: Jack Nicholson, Pierce Brosnan, Sarah Jessica Parker

Stage: Home theatre, TV selection for a Friday night

Mars in short: It is a normal day for everyone, until the President of the United States announces Martians have been spotted circling Earth. The Martians land and a meeting is arranged, but not everything goes to plan, and the Martians seem to have other plans for Earth. Are they just misunderstood beings or do they really want to destroy all of humanity?

Hm. never seen this piece, although I am aware of its notoriousness a while ago. And the people who's opinion I respect, told me it was a nice piece to see.

Well, another dissappointment. Genuinely, I despise parodies on a certain type of movies and I seldom find them funny anyway. So I am neither fan of more stupid ones like Austin Powers, nor am I a fan of more sophisticated ones (are there any at all?). Anyhow, this is a fine example of making a remake of more than five movies on the topic of aliens, chasing extraordinary images, fighting with weird weapons - and aside, using top notch actors, like Nicholson, Brosnan, Parker and hoping the crowds are going to come because of that cast.
Now, life isn't a bunch of marshmallows all the time. Put it differently, I have seen disastrous pieces put together with the finest crew. One of more dissappointing ones includes Will Smith, Wild Wild West. And this is just one example from the top of my head.
This piece dissappoints me too. No real act. Nicholson acts like the leader of bunch of clowns, which is, ironically, exactly what the movie is all about. Parker is there for the sake of representing the beautiful feminine side (yet limited). All the others just float through scenes instead of acting.
I give up. Not worhty of my time, not worthy of yours. If you are a fan of Austin Powers, you might enjoy it. In all other cases, don't. Really don't :)

My personal rate: 1,0 (and only because I adore the most of the cast. I thought the movie is shitty!)

Mars Attacks on IMDB

Crazy Heart, 2009

Crazy Heart, 2009
Director: Scott Cooper
Cast: Jeff Bridges, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Colin Farrel

Stage: Home theatre

Crazy heart in short:Bad Blake is a broken-down, hard-living country music singer who's had way too many marriages, far too many years on the road and one too many drinks way too many times. And yet, Bad can't help but reach for salvation with the help of Jean, a journalist who discovers the real man behind the musician.

Preps: Another one waiting in the line of those on my disc. Eventually they all come to their turn :)

: Ohhhhhh. So bad it hurts my eyes. I cannot stare at this loser on the screen, representing an old musician, trying to make a dime while drinking for the last dollars he has. Are they for real? What did the director think? The viewer is thrown in a hell he cannot escape from. Do I want to see this drunkard? He's not giving me wisdom, nor simpathy, nor am I feeling empathy, argh. I am wondering, whether the movie is heading anywhere, but I am out of luck, I guess. After a fallen show he's doing for approximately ten people in the bowling arena in some local atmosphere, I give up. The music is something I can't hear. The dialogues are so drunk and stupid. The feeling is shitty. I disrespect the feeling I am getting on a fine Saturday evening. Therefore the end is near and inevitable. I erase the damn thing.
If you have something better to do, do it. Nevermind the fact that we have a Colin Farrel and Jeff Bridges placed inside. They act like puppets. Which you don't want to see ever again. And it should be banned and never distributed, this piece. I am sure that the aim is realistic. The fallout of the stars is inevitable and in most cases so nasty it hurts throughout your veins. But this perticular piece leaves me empty and cold. So I dare to seize into this feeling and delete it.

My personal rate: 0,0
(I erased it after half an hour. Don't waste your time!!)

Crazy Heart on IMDB

Dec 2, 2011

Hereafter, 2010

Hereafter, 2010
Director: Clint Eastwood
Cast: Matt Damon, Cecile de France, Bryce Dallas Howard

Stage: Home theatre, cool midnight tweek

Hereafter in short
:A drama centered on three people who are haunted by mortality in different ways. George (Damon) is a blue-collar American who has a special connection to the afterlife. On the other side of the world, Marie (de France), a French journalist, has a near-death experience that shakes her reality. And when Marcus (Frankie/George McLaren), a London schoolboy, loses the person closest to him, he desperately needs answers. Each on a path in search of the truth, their lives will intersect, forever changed by what they believe might-or must-exist in the hereafter.

: a remaining item on the to do list. Just came along.

Reality:Well, the first surprise is definitely Damon. And the second the good role of a media person a new face (Cecile) is playing. I adore the fact that three different lives and roles are exchanging until they somehow mix. And I love all three dramas in one. The first one, facing a tsunami on what it was supposed to be a romantic getaway, and facing the life after this, and having a death (facing death) experience while you were at it. The second, being so close to the brother you love dearly, living with a mother that is an alcoholic and after losing the brother, losing a grip to life itself. The third one, being a psychic, able to read what is a pain in other people's lives, not being normal at all and having a brother that cannot accept the fact that this isn't what you want to do. A lot of pain distributed in this movie, a lot of real case live examples of what you wouldn't want to be a part of or what you wouldn't want to experience by yourself.
Eastwood flies this plane safely and surely until the all three different worlds collide and unite, with the help of Damon (the psychic that can read people and doesn't have an own personality), crashing into Dicken's reading somewhere in London. A brilliantly set range of actions, that consequently set all three lives in order. Untraditionally, yet it breaks the heart while you want to see beyond. These are main stories. The side story, what is the afterlife all about, doesn't run in parallel, like a bad subconscience it reveals every now and then in some kind of sci-fi vision that some people experience, no real explanation or no real action afterwards. Is this what Eastwood really sees as afterlife? A bunch of statues, where one runs across to another? I don't know. But as the parallel and not first chosen story, the secret remains buried and is left to the spectator's imagination. Which isn't really bad, as I despise some insinuations and some major breakthroughs which don't seem real. However, in this case we don't hold enough evidence to state true or false. Just believable or not.
Some real life examples on how bad it can get. Two kids waiting for a half drunk mum. A couple being together as long it seems to benefit both careers. And brother love that exceeds expectations, when one forces another to read a person he doesn't really want to. And my absolutely favourite part - Damon with a sweet lady at the cooking class, tasting without seeing what they are going to eat. Sweeeeeet.

My personal rate: 7,0
(a good solid piece, will make you think about what to do if the d day comes and more important, what is beyond)

Hereafter on IMDB

Nov 29, 2011

Pay it forward, 2000

Pay it forward, 2000
Director: Mimi Leder
Cast: Kevin Spacey, Helen Hunt, Haley Joel Osment

Stage: home TV selection on a fine Tuesday evening

Pay it forward in short:
Young Trevor McKinney, troubled by his mother's alcoholism and fears of his abusive but absent father, is caught up by an intriguing assignment from his new social studies teacher, Mr. Simonet. The assignment: think of something to change the world and put it into action. Trevor conjures the notion of paying a favor not back, but forward--repaying good deeds not with payback, but with new good deeds done to three new people. Trevor's efforts to make good on his idea bring a revolution not only in the lives of himself, his mother and his physically and emotionally scarred teacher, but in those of an ever-widening circle of people completely unknown to him.

Preps: This is a must see. I have seen it several times and this time I am going to submerge the piece to my critical eye.

Reality: As said, this is one of Hollywood's classics. Most of my friends must have seen this already. It has the most exquisite genuine idea I have experienced again and again as I was watching this for several times. To give good and receive good should be one of the practical views in every person's soul. However, the idea starts with a teacher, brilliantly played by Spacey, where he wants to implement the seed into his young students. What can anyone do to change the world? And not meaning with this to flush the toilet once per day to skip water usage during the day. Or collect garbage. Per se, I do have an example which resembles Pay it forward approach. A slovenian youngster wrote some time ago about the movement, where you collect trash. A piece of trash per day. And more people joined in an instant, than he ever imagined. So we have collected trash every day and crowds are joining the movement. Ergo, we have a cleaner place to live in.
The analogy with pay it forward approach is inevitable. However, this piece describes doing a favor to someone that cannot do this or cannot achieve this by him/herself. Which means the responsibility of the carrier to recognize the things that come in question. And for the receiver not to put it on a silver plate. Normally these things have something in common with our fears, feelings, shameful stuff we don't want to disclose, etc. In some reality examples from this piece we face some prisoners being let go, some taxi drives being made for free, a homeless person getting a meal.. there is a lot of good that this movie spreads and you cannot help it, you need to let it also in your heart.
The side story (by this I mean love between the mother and teacher) becomes pretty irrelevant comparing it to the big deed this pay it forward approach can leave on the viewer. However, the story about a new potential relationship gets also profound, because we are dealing with very damaged individuals that are trying to put the puzzles of the life back together. Also a perspective you will think about when you see the piece.

Still, the main red thin line in the movie and also the thing to think about while and after watching is doing good to other people or live creatures. Finally, a pyramid that works for human wellbeing, as oppose to other commercial ones.

My personal rate: 8,0 (a classic must see. Will make you shiver within your soul at some scenes. And leave a warm feeling you need to do something as well).

Pay it forward on IMDB

The Twilight Saga - Breaking Dawn, 2011

The Twilight Saga, Breaking Dawn, 2011
Director: Bill Condon
Cast: Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, Taylor Lautner

Stage: Local Colloseum, theatre with a lot of teens at that point. Late Sunday night

The saga in short: The Quileute's close in on expecting parents Edward and Bella, whose unborn child poses a threat to the Wolf Pack and the towns people of Forks.

Preps: As I adore the books, I am one of fans and I need to see it. I love love stories that aren't meant to happen but happen anyway. It's written so well that I need to see the piece.

Reality: wow. I am thrilled to see some genuine romantic shots for a couple that wasn't meant to be but still got to the romantic wedding Edward dreamt of. I love the movie interpretation of some dialogues that I have depicted in my imagination. It is obvious that they followed the scenario (the book) to the smallest details and I am sure that it could have been interpreted differently. Nevertheless, I am grateful it happens in such a mushy way (the way your romantic spirit melts as you watch it). But beware, no place for irony here. I am talking about the mere interpretation of what some authors call everlasting love, love that happens once in life and cannot be broken by eternity.
So, if you consider and accept this, you will love the first half of the movie. The beautiful wedding, a cliche and everything a dream wedding means to a lot of girls. With a perfect honey moon that dawns in a forthcoming birth. Now the dilemma, who is worth more, the newborn that you are not sure whether it's a normal baby or a monster, or the mother. In other words, can a couple decide together what to do (either to lose the child or bear it to its birth), or is it completely up to the mother. And is it egoistic for a mother to insist on having the new life, even though she's clear she's probably not going to survive this? The dilemmas just continue and expand. Can a family influence the decision. Is the newborn something that can separate the poles in one family.. and more important, can a best friend and someone you love, really influence on one's decision? The second half of the movie is the true antipod to the first half, as it brings action, depression, death and birth, decisions that are exceeding one's competencies.. and moreover, it brings also hope. And proves the world's eternal cliche, that still holds in Hollywood movies - hope is all we have and maybe, just maybe everything is going to be allright. As I have read the script, I know what happens, so no drama for me. And a true Hollywood ending. Maybe the author should consider bringing some poison into the development of the story. But.. on the other hand.. this is a world of vampires and werewolves - even miracles are allowed here. A good solid rate from me. Watch it, especially if you liked the previous parts. It's the most romantic and inspiring part of them all.

My personal rate: 8,5 ( I adored it. Could be better in some aspects, but a true version of the book. And a beautiful love story)

The Twilight saga on IMDB