Pirates of the Carribean: On Stranger Tides, 2011

Pirates of the Carribean: On Stranger Tides, 2011
Director: Rob Marshall
Cast: Johnny Depp, Penelope Cruz, Ian McShane, Geoffrey Rush



Stage: Local theatre, 3D with glasses (can you imagine the fact that you pay extra for the 3D show and after that, you still need to pay for the glasses before you enter the theatre? Feels like an undeveloped state..)

Pirates in short: Captain Jack Sparrow (Depp) crosses paths with a woman from his past (Cruz), and he's not sure if it's love -- or if she's a ruthless con artist who's using him to find the fabled Fountain of Youth. When she forces him aboard the Queen Anne's Revenge, the ship of the formidable pirate Blackbeard (McShane), Jack finds himself on an unexpected adventure in which he doesn't know who to fear more: Blackbeard or the woman from his past.


Preps: Wow, is it the fourth in the row? So silent launch, I accidentally found the news about the premiere on the local news. I cannot believe it - I think I heard some rumours in this week. I am anxious to get my hands on this piece, as I am a huge fan of Carribean Pirates, not to say Johnny Depp as first obviously ;)


Reality: I feel like I'm stuck in a cartoon. And I never want to be drug out of this one. Sparrow remains Sparrow, the mistery they are solving this time seems similar, the dame is another and main villains are also somewhat same.
What makes this a masterpiece? Well, the bundle, I guess. The music is stimulating and makes you want to dance while you are watching. The move Sparrow keeps making makes me want to repeat it, same as some fans want to still repeat Jackson's moves :)
It is the same and at this point, I think I know it by heart. It just gives an add on to all the fights.

The humour is also one of the main characters of the movie. You need to get into the mood "everything is possible", to cope with this piece. I think that in any other brain mindset you will get lost in all the doubtful stories, all the actions of stealing something right before your nose. And of course, all get well and noone will get hurt. If not submerged to the pirate's laws :)

In Slovenia, we have a good comic book by Miki Muster. When I was young, I wanted to read this constantly. And I could never get fed up by those three characters. Stories similar, fights changed only in scene positioning, but solid good humour and fun to read. The same feeling I have here with the saga of the Pirates - I am absolutely a fan, although I admit it's not rocket science now with the fourth sequel. Now, as we are marketeered by the first piece and the audience usually gets accomodated with the first part (and normally hates the other parts), in this case, you cannot hate this part. It is just as fun to watch as the first one. But I do admit the first one was a hit in the heart for most of the viewers, including me. The scenery couldn't be more magical - most of the scenes were shot in the jungle of Dominica. And some of Photo Shop helps, of course. Still, you will enjoy your ride with the Pirates, if you liked the first parts.


My personal rate: 6,0 (a good piece, especially regarding the fact that it's the fourth in the row - normalwise, the fun and the quality staggers when the director wants to make a second last sentence or even third or fourth).


Pirates on IMDB

Pirates official home page

Firewall, 2006

Firewall, 2006
Director:Richard Loncraine
Cast: Harrison Ford, Virginia Madsen, Paul Bettany


Stage: Home TV Selection after a long day


Firewall in short: With his family held for ransom, the head security executive for a global bank is commanded to loot his own business for millions in order to ensure his wife and children's safety. He then faces the demanding task of thwarting the kidnapper's grand scheme, which makes him look guilty of embezzlement.


Preps: I have seen this piece several times and I am aware it's a fairy good action.


Reality: The movie exposes a big problem one can face when someone kidnaps his/her personality, family, life, and how easily everything gets turned upside down. A lot of presumptions in the movie are fairly childish and make think that the director underestimated the intelligence of the spectator. Nevertheless, a solid action and a thinkthrough, how much the data on the internet is worth, who is your persona and what to do, if you have your identity stolen.

Ford here shows no difference to his other similar action movies ( The Fugitive, Patriot Games, etc). As the main protagonist, once he's in the role of the main defender of the country, other time in the role of defender of the family and he will do anything to protect them. Similar as Willis in his sagas Die Hard or copies of this one. Ford's role is unrivaled, first acts, then thinks, first feels, then acts. With a fair judgement, this is the unique role he feels at home the most.

The piece is nothing really special. Predictable, thrilling at times, and fun to see on a lovely evening. You won't get your veins filtered, but as said, a solid piece.


My personal rate: 5,5 (a good repeat to see, nothing really special, but also a fairly safe choice to go along with on a rainy day)

Firewall on IMDB

The Silence of the Lambs, 1991

The Silence of the Lambs, 1991
Director: Jonathan Demme
Cast: Anthony Hopkins, Jodie Foster, Scott Glenn


Stage: Home TV selection on a Sunday night. A dozenth time to see this :)


Silence in short: Young FBI agent Clarice Starling is assigned to help find a missing woman to save her from a psychopathic serial killer who skins his victims. Clarice attempts to gain a better insight into the twisted mind of the killer by talking to another psychopath Hannibal Lecter, who used to be a respected psychiatrist. FBI agent Jack Crawford believes that Lecter who is also a very powerful and clever mind manipulator have the answers to their questions to help locate the killer. Clarice must first try and gain Lecter's confidence before he is to give away any information.
Preps: None in perticular. I have seen this at the movies as well as home several times. I know it serves to my needs this evening.


Reality: This piece is one of the greater achievements in this genre. A brilliant act of two main protagonists, Jodie Foster and Anthony Hopkins, makes this one an inspiring and thrilling experience. It is a simple crime story, however it takes a deep dive into psychological sphere, with the viewer not knowing what the devil has in mind (Hopkins), even though under bars. It's unimaginable, what imagination can do to you - even though the scenes are smartly hidden, you cannot wait to feel what hasn't been revealed. Quite an opposite from that kind, being filmed these days (a good example in the Saw).

Until the very end, you cannot tell, whether the girl is going to be found alive or not. Or where does the psycho under bars takes his wits (intelligence) and knowing where to seek and what to expect. And how to get under Jodie Foster's skin for that matter. Every time she tries to speak with him, you feel they are connected and that he's stripping her in front of the audience. A masterpiece, for sure. Worth seeing in any dimension possible. You will adore her and you will hate and love him at the same time. And be eager to save the young lady they are seeking for.

The idea of having a dress made out of skin was outrageous at that time. Now it's not really, we have seen this already repeatebly. However, at that point it was brilliant, unique and made sure the sits were full.

My personal rate: 9,0 (in my opinion, the beginner of several originals that followed, worth seeing and reconsidered from viewer's perspective)


The Silence of the Lambs on IMDB

Enemy at the Gates, 2001

Enemy At The Gates, 2001
Director: Jean-Jacques Annaud
Cast: Jude Law, Ed Harris, Joseph Fiennes



Stage; Home TV Selection

Enemy in short: During the WWII battle of Stalingrad, two snipers, a Russian, and a German, are locked in a battle of wills and marksmanship, while the Russian is boosted to the status of hero by a political official.


Preps: none whatsoever. However, I am aware this is an awarded war movie.


Reality: Sometimes war movies strike you with their unability to hide. It's one thing reading about crimes in war and fighting for the cause, it's totally another seeing that for real. Or at least, an image of this for real on screen, in raw as it is shown here.

The piece shows policy, fighting and changing sides, dying for your cause. The battle for Stalingrad is one of the most notorious ones, most talked about in that area, and the fight with most guesses what happened. I imagine that every director takes his turn into making some of the history online, vivid and real. Now, how much of this is actually taken by history and how much made up by director - it's up to you to decide.
In this case, I sense a deep insight into the emotions of soldier that seeks piece and finds love. And dies while trying to defend it. Dying of the young kids or better put, killing young children, makes me sick.
Thrown in the middle of the fight, with the rats, dust, and lost hope, the viewer is put right in between fires, making it all really hard not be touched by. And you will be, the war fear will go right into your veins and make you never want to experience it. And in my opinion, this is the mere purpose of having these movies. Although they make us stiff and hard watching the scenes of shooting and killing over and over again (in the sense that the media doesn't surprise us at all in these days anymore), they also imply how useless and painful is to have a fight, war, even a world war. No fun or gain, just loss. To each individual.

Love in a war - making every moment count. More than we are really realizing in the real life, although we should. War circumstances make just everything move faster and happen with a cause.


My personal rating: 8,0 (a superb movie on Stalingrad war).
Enemy at the gates on IMDB

Little Fockers, 2010

Little Fockers, 2010
Director: Paul Weitz
Cast: Jessica Alba, Ben Stiller, Robert De Niro


Stage: Home theatre
Preps: Hm, my friend wanted me to watch this at the movies. Not in a million years. I don't know whether to expect even worse crap than the last one of the Fockers saga. Let's see.

Fockers in short: It has taken 10 years, two little Fockers with wife Pam (Polo) and countless hurdles for Greg to finally get "in" with his tightly wound father-in-law, Jack. After the cash-strapped dad takes a job moonlighting for a drug company, however, Jack's suspicions about his favorite male nurse come roaring back. When Greg and Pam's entire clan-including Pam's lovelorn ex, Kevin (Owen Wilson)-descends for the twins' birthday party, Greg must prove to the skeptical Jack that he's fully capable as the man of the house. But with all the misunderstandings, spying and covert missions, will Greg pass Jack's final test and become the family's next patriarch...or will the circle of trust be broken for good?


Reality: Well, I have seen worse movies. I still think De Niro should think a bit before choosing Fockers 1 in the first place. And here we have the fourth sequel. How bad can it get? - Well, De Niro is the Godfather here, making me a bit laugh as he tries to somehow embed this into a comedy and picture himself as the god himself. It is from a comedy perspective I can judge I have seen worse comedies, that however doesn't mean this is a good one. It's pretty solid, making all the family known affairs open and ready to discuss also in the head of the viewer. It is a common problem, the family is facing, and I am sure that a lot of audience can recognize some of their lives inside this piece.
Still - Ben Stiller gives a bad name to man nurses. They cannot be all without a backbone. Ready to be told what they think and how they should act. But also because of such movies, we collect prejudice and make them real once we meet real people that are in such roles in real life.


My personal rate: 5,0 (The piece isn't something really special. But.. I maintained it until the end without deleting. Which can mean I had a real tolerance that day.. or that it isn't as crappy as I expected.)


Little Fockers on IMDB

Captain Corelli's Mandolin, 2001

Captain Corelli's Mandolin, 2001
Director: John Madden
Cast:Nicholas Cage, Penelope Cruz, John Hurt



Corelli's in short - In 1941, Italy allies with Germany and ruthlessly conquers the much weaker country of Greece. On a remote Greek island, an Italian artillery garrison is established to maintain order. One Italian officer, Captain Corelli, adopts an attitude of mutual co-existence with the Greeks and engages in such activities as music festivals and courting the daughter of a local doctor. In 1943, however, after Italy surrenders to the Allies and changes sides in the war, Captain Corelli must defend the Greek island against a German invasion.

Stage: Home TV selection on an exhausting day - in the evening, when everything in the day went wrong but the evening is fit to cope with this selection


Preps: I have started to watch this piece several times, but never finished, something always came up. Will this one be a lucky time?


Reality: The movie is one of the splendid pieces of misunderstood love in the time of war. And the cruelty of the war itself, making arlies, making enemies, turning someone into a friend or quite the opposite.. Movies like these always make me think about the origin of the war and all the men behind it. Repeat, all the men behind it. OK, I am aware of some of women, involved in several (or being at the back, dragging the curtains, while the men fought - like Cleopatra, Queens of England, etc.) However, the idea of having thousands of men out there fighting because someone told them to, losing the faith, belief, not knowing who to trust, stealing, raping, abusing.. and being away from their homes several years while doing all this, coming home as animals or at least other persons.., makes huge rage inside me. And the reason why this is necessary? I don't think it's necessary at all. In my romantic perspective I would make all wars dissappear. But, if I cannot do that or if this is truly unreal, then it's necessary to watch these kinds of movies and remember, where wars lead and what kind of monsters lie in each and everyone of us, if we are provoked the right way.
The movie somehow reminds me of Malena (with Monica Belucci, superb act in that piece). We have a woman figure that falls for the wrong man. Nothing really new about this - ever since Romeo and Juliet we have been seeing that kind of play. But every now and then, an extraordinary interpretation comes along. This is quite the one. Both of them aren't really meant to be stuck in this world of war. Cage, with his talent and love for music and she, the wannabe doctor, just trying not to fit at all in the show. A beautiful love story, filled with emotions and yearning, filled with all the wrong and the right things. And the idea, that the true love can last forever
The movie starts and ends with the same idea - community energy and love will take the people that are a part of it, a very long way. The dance in circle, to celebrate the feast of the season. The energy that was lost in the war comes back once again.
Are friends really friends in times of war? You can be certain that after seeing this "romance", you will for sure have some doubts in your head. Did nazis fight with italians? For sure. But did they also kill them? Of course. It just depends on the time slot you are looking at. The movie is one big historical "factogram" how the Greeks saw the whole deal (and all the islands for that matter).
The quote I love the most in the piece: You fall in love and out of love through the eyes. Because you fall in love with a person, not the body.


My personal rating: 8,0 (a strong piece, filled with things to think about)

Captain on IMDB

Just go with it, 2011

Just go with it, 2011
Director: Dennis Dugan
Cast: Jennifer Aniston, Adam Sandler


Stage: Home theatre

Preps: none in perticular, just know that young people are running to catch this one in the theatre, but in my opinion, it should be "to be watched at home" material

Just go with it in short: Danny (Adam Sandler) must engage Katherine (Jennifer Aniston), his faithful assistant, to pretend to be his soon to be ex-wife. Danny must pretend that he is married, because he lied to his dream girl, Palmer (Brooklyn Decker) the most gorgeous woman in the world. To keep the woman he loves, covering up one lie soon turns into many lies.


Reality: Yuk. A romantic story, indeed. Aniston, playing Sandler's "supposed to be ex-wife" joke, is terrible. Adam Sandler, last seen in a fairly good romantic piece long time ago (The Wedding Singer), is also lost in space in this one. I hate him from the start, lying his way through the storyline, making romance with a woman he is lying to, cheating on Aniston in another line. ..

Yuk again. The dialogue sucks, the idea that you can just lie your way out of everything is cheesy and not real, the stage is awful and I hate the jokes, because I don't find them funny or as jokes. Therefore, a solid delete after half an hour. I suggest you do the same or even better, don't watch it at all!





My personal rating: 0,0 (a disaster, skip it and run for your life. An embarassment in the main actor's biography, for sure)

Just go with it on IMDB

Limitless, 2011

Limitless, 2011
Director: Neil Burger
Cast:Bradley Cooper, Anna Friel, Abbie Cornish, Robert De Niro



Stage: Home theatre, late at night

Limitless in short:An action-thriller about a writer who takes an experimental drug that allows him to use 100 percent of his mind. As one man evolves into the perfect version of himself, forces more corrupt than he can imagine mark him for assassination. Out-of-work writer Eddie Morra's (Cooper) rejection by girlfriend Lindy (Abbie Cornish) confirms his belief that he has zero future. That all vanishes the day an old friend introduces Eddie to NZT, a designer pharmaceutical that makes him laser focused and more confident than any man alive. Now on an NZT-fueled odyssey, everything Eddie's read, heard or seen is instantly organized and available to him. As the former nobody rises to the top of the financial world, he draws the attention of business mogul Carl Van Loon (De Niro), who sees this enhanced version of Eddie as the tool to make billions. But brutal side effects jeopardize his meteoric ascent. With a dwindling stash and hit men who will eliminate him to get the NZT...

Preps: Well, a notorious piece a while ago at the movies, but haven't had the chance to check it out. All I know is some kind of viagra, that is taken, but one for the brain :)

Reality: Wow, it begins with an added value. I definitely want to see loser becoming a victory man, Making my dream come true and answer what people yearn for centuries - how to stimulate your brain in order to make more out of all the data coming in every day.. There is supposed to be 5000-7000 various pieces of information stimulating your brains every day. You don't believe it? Of course you don't - because 99% of this you cannot remember. However, with this plastic miracle, you can.

Same as in the matrix, the main protagonist is put under a spell, after taking the drug. Obviously you cannot live without it and no, you cannot go back. What's the benefit? You get to remember everything you ever learned about, you get to maintain and upgrade existing knowledge within seconds.. you get to stimulate girls and make them laugh in an instant (obviously intelligence makes miracles).. etc. You get everything. Now, how about a downfall?
Like every drug, you cannot maintain the level without physical consequences.. therefore, you are screwed, when you run out of them. On the other hand, Cooper gets lucky and has a whole stack of these babies. One per day,.. and he's superman/Einstein/everything he ever wanted to be. Is his soul the same? This seems to be the main question, as he enters another time zone when taking the drug. And another timeframe in his mind. What kind of the person do you then meet, what are that person's feelings, ideas.. what is he when he isn't a god - good philosophical dilemmas hapenning, as we seek towards the end of this. Can he really finish in one year and make a huge amount of money in that time, to make him and his girlfriend rich and happy / least this is what he believes..
The run towards the end of the movie is too long and I get bored in the mean time. De Niro makes a good entrance and a good exit. But where is he in the mean time? Stage not that impressive, music is good enhancement of various scenes. And Cooper's act is quite good. Nevertheless, I think that in its third part, the piece loses its edge and its breath.


My personal rate: 5,5 (a superb idea, but poorly executed. I wish the director would re think the way he made his stage and his workflow..)


Limitless on IMDB

Meet Joe Black, 1998

Meet Joe Black, 1998
Director: Martin Brest
Cast: Brad Pitt, Anthony Hopkins, Claire Forlani



Stage: Home TV selection

Joe Black in short: Bill Parrish, media tycoon, loving father and still a human being, is about to celebrate his 65th birthday. One morning, he is contacted by the Inevitable - by hallucination, as he thinks. Later, Death itself enters his home and his life, personified in a man's body: Joe Black has arrived. His intention was to take Bill with him, but accidentally, Joe's former host and Bills beautiful daughter Susan have already met. Joe begins to develop certain interest in life on earth as well as in Susan, who has no clue who she's flirting with.


Preps: Good cast, good storyline, good time to see this again.

Reality: One of the finest stories in the last decade. How to face the devil or how to accept you are dying - what to do next, what to do in the days that are left. Who to tell and in what way. And what to do if the devil is living with you in your last few days and just happens to flirt with your daughter.

Some of the questions, the movie is trying to answer. In my head, the most important one is how to indulge the days that are left and what to do with the remaining time. Do you actually look behind and try to improve some unjustice you might have done.. or do you act as if nothing happened, like Bill doesn't in this piece. The viewer is left with truly funny scenes of trying to implement the devil in god's body into his family, with some obscene lies that are put together because the identity of the devil must remain unknown, yet a complete stranger is walking through the family bedrooms and bad enough, flirting with the only child (that is unfortunately, up to the third of the movie, already taken by another man).

Now, the development between the beauty and the beast in the disguise is extremely interesting, the dialogues are well put together and also executed - you even get the feeling that Death /or Devil, you might put it as you wish, is a good man, that causes also redemption and forgives the sins you might have done. And cures /or puts people to the eternal rest upon their wish.

How deep is the circle we are living in and what is beyond -something to be terrified about or something to look forward to? This movie implies there is nothing to be afraid of, therefore it also implies the existance of heaven, God, Death also in impersonated figure and also, room for improvement, while you are still on Earth, living and breathing. The love game between Joe and Susan seems real, but may be hard to take. Hopkins cast is brilliant, firm figure of the power that is not yet willing to go. Yet to God, we must all bend - the movie says so. I remain doubtful. A good piece, but doesn't go hand in hand with my atheistic approach. Or philosophical seeking for the proof of concept.


My personal rating: 7,5 ( a strong piece in making you think about life versus death, things you need to go through before you leave this place. And a solid love story).

Meet Joe Black on IMDB

Practical Magic, 1998

Practical Magic, 1998
Director: Griffin Dunne
Cast: NIcole Kidman, Sandra Bullock, Stockard Channing


Practical Magic in Short: Sally and Gillian Owens have always known they were different. Raised by their aunts after their parents' death, the sisters grew up in a household that was anything but typical--their aunts fed them chocolate cake for breakfast and taught them the uses of practical magic. But the invocation of the Owens' sorcery also carries a price--some call it a curse: the men they fall in love with are doomed to an untimely death. Now adult women with very different personalities, the quiet Sally and the fiery Gillian must use all of their powers to fight the family curse and a swarm of supernatural forces that threatens the lives of all the Owens women.


Stage: Home TV selection

Preps: I think I have seen this in the theatres, but didn't like it a lot. Now, as I don't have anything constructive to do and I am a fan of Kidman and Bullock, let's see if I was wrong.


Reality: Well, sometimes you are correct in the first time you decide for something. This is a good example of not really brilliantly thought-through scenario and furthermore, a weak story. Practical magic should offer something more than the series Bewitched, in this sense or in this case it is not so. It is just a filmed version up to some extent, of the named series from 80'ies. Bullock and Kidman are picted as naive, the cast is weak. The fooling around with some magic is somehow cute or romantic in some moments, but nothing more. The curse they are trying to break, is weak and without any real background, therefore I don't buy it.

Apart from this, no really positive feelings. I get bored and despite the fact, that I love watching both ladies, in one hour I get bored to death and switch the channel. Not enough to stimulate my brais at all. So, I don't recommend it.


My personal rating: 2,0 (some cute moments and some practical ideas how to make some things more interesting - or try to pull out some magic).
Practical Magic on IMDB

Ratatouille, 2007

Ratatouille, 2007
Director: Brad Bird, Jan Pinkava
Cast (voices): Brad Garrett, Lou Romano, Patton Oswalt



Stage: Home theatre, on a lazy Sunday afternoon


The piece in a glance/in short: Remy is a young rat in the French countryside who arrives in Paris, only to find out that his cooking idol is dead. When he makes an unusual alliance with a restaurant's new garbage boy, the culinary and personal adventures begin despite Remy's family's skepticism and the rat-hating world of humans.



Preps: I have seen this cartoon a lot of times and it inspires me every single time. Hence, a lovely change of lately bad pieces I have seen.


Reality: This is the piece to be blamed to make an increase in sales of rats worldwide, especially in Europe and USA. The cartoon makes these creatures friendly and nice, smart and emotional. Hence the viewer is surrounded with a warm, tender feeling for the animal depicted as The Little Chef.

A rat being able to cook? In what universe? Well, in Ratatouille, we get a glance at a big cuisine preparation - similar to the one seen on series Ramsey's Hell Kitchen or something like this. The world of passion, struggle and rivalry among the great chefs. The storyline takes us from the unusual placement of a young rat that has a taste. Unsimilar to the "regular" rats we are used to, this one want to be different and is different, elopes from its family and takes a big dive into world of chefs. Throughout this, Remy meets a new friend and teaches him (guides him) to cook. And in the mean time, the young chef falls in love (and learns to cook, of course). In my opinion, the world shown in this animated piece, is truly a good copy of the real life, in the sense that you see all from the deepest secrets everyone is trying to keep for themselves, to pure economical perspective. How lucrative must a kitchen be, to keep it running? And what is acceptable side cost, how to treat great critics of the food.. And last, but not least - what is Ratatouille and how to make it.

The piece inspired me to go into the kitchen and to be creative. In no perspective it made me feel something for the rats. I will keep on despising them, however, in my opinion, one of the better put together pieces in terms of consistency (bad versus evil, poor becomes rich, love conquers all, and yes, we have a downfall or two of the main character). It will bring out the best feelings out of your soul. In addition, it will make you probably hungry :)


My personal rating: 8,0 (lovely piece, for adults that are fans of cartoons, as well as children).


Ratatouille on IMDB

Room in Rome, 2010

Room in Rome, 2010
Director: Julio Medem
Cast: Elena Anaya, Natasha Yarovenko, Enrico Lo



Stage: Home theatre

Room in Rome in short: A hotel room in the center of Rome serves as the setting for two young and recently acquainted women to have a physical adventure that touches their very souls.


Preps: None in perticular - I am not familiar with the topic nor the movie itself. So no expectations in perticular, just hope to get a good job at selecting the next one..in the row of many to come on my disk.



Reality: The movie begins quite interestingly - draws my attention because of the sexual tension it brings. Obviously the two women are going to end up in bed, the mere question is after what time and up to what extent. Or in what pose, to turn this a bit into humour. Because after 20 minutes, this is all you are stuck with. The movie doesn't have a glow, it doesn't posess the energy. The vision lacking, the idea is stuck somewhere in the beginning of the movie. I don't like it even one bit.

On the other hand, it does hold some potential to be one of more sexy movies lately, strictly in terms of arrowsement. Nothing about it makes it even a bit more interesting. The picturesque city could be exploited more - the viewer is stuck with erotic moments of two ladies in the room. For this reason all televisions worldwide hold porn channels. And in some cases, better ones, including two or even more women. I am not claiming that a scene with two women cannot be extraordinary, or brilliant, just The Room in Rome doesn't posess any in perticular. For that reason, the movie vanishes quickly off my disk. A mistake to watch, don't recommend it. The cast, the scene, dialogues, lack of music, lack of interest from my side.. all this rests in my head, when I am writing this. Therefore, use your time more wisely.



My personal rating: 0 (no comment, a waste to watch).


Room in Rome on IMDB

The Green Mile, 1999

The Green Mile, 1999
Director: Frank Darabont
Cast: Tom Hanks, Michael Clarke Duncan, David Morse



Stage: Home theatre, on the lovely Saturday night

The Green Mile in short: Paul Edgecomb is a slightly cynical veteran prison guard on Death row in the 1930's. His faith, and sanity, deteriorated by watching men live and die, Edgecomb is about to have a complete turn around in attitude. Enter John Coffey, He's eight feet tall. He has hands the size of waffle irons. He's been accused of the murder of two children... and he's afraid to sleep in a cell without a night-light. And Edgecomb, as well as the other prison guards - Brutus, a sympathetic guard, and Percy, a stuck up, perverse, and violent person, are in for a strange experience that involves intelligent mice, brutal executions, and the revelation about Coffey's innocence and his true identity.


Preps: I have read the book and seen the movie several times. Although it's three hours long, I have always this inner sense, like a citizen duty, to see it again, if I have the chance.


Reality: The storyline is striking. The Green Mile is the name for the last few yards someone takes before dying under law conviction in a jail. In this case, you follow a convict of enormous size, his inner strenght and special powers that make him the most special guy in the prison and this the amazing story you can easily buy. We love to believe in miracles, if they are put on screen with a powerful story (Stephen King's novel) and powerful cast, they can make a challenge to find something you don't like in a movie. In this sense, you will be touched several times and filled with most powerful feelings - like you would open the Pandora's box in some sense.

The story within a story, making two retired people come closer together with this amazing story that happened 50 years ago, it makes this piece even more worth seeing. And makes you think about your sins and the things you should remorse. It will not make me more religious - not in the catholic way anyway. But it makes me inspired and thinking all miracles can happen if you believe they can. The will will find the way and the good will surpress evil. In all this positive feelings you get squashed by the impossible hatred you find for the governmental laws and all the bad guys that go away and good guys that get a conviction like this and cannot do anything about it.

However, the idea of the movie is positive and will inspire you with some actions you will want to take in order to make some good. If the green mile seems so long, you need to walk through it and face your responsibilities. The movie will inspire you to do so. Return the good with good. And will fill you with a terrible feeling towards the system, because one person cannot bend it, even though you have a solid evidence it's wrong or it did unjustice.


My personal rating: 8,0 (one of the most touching ones on the topic. Truly a great piece you will find interesting and suited to the soul).

The Green Mile on IMDB

The Rite, 2011

The Rite, 2011
Director: Mikail Hafstrom
Cast: Anthony Hopkins, Colin O'Donoghue, Ciaran Hinds



Stage: Local theatre, an impulsive idea to watch something really late

The Rite in short: An American seminary student travels to Italy to take an exorcism course.

Preps: There isn't much of a selection in our theatres in this moment. At least not in what I would find interesting enough to see in the theatre. Hopkins again, makes my expectations high enough and sets some standards for me to see this. He doesn't make many mistakes in his picks of the movie..


Reality: I was told this is a commercial break for those that believe in god and allmighty magic. The Rome magic, I mean in this sense. Well, the ones that told me this, were absolutely right. I find a deep remorsement when watching this because it implies the only belief there should be possible - the one in god. As an atheist, I strive to find deeper philosophy and logic behind those ideas. It doesn't matter if it's an catholic, orthodox, any kind of religion. I just find the idea that only one religion is the true one, totally wrong and selfish. Or maybe challenging, not to be that harsh. I for myself and my own state of mind try to seek a crossing between all the things that are happening around the globe and are said to be divine (the miracles, Virgin Mary's appearing, Buddha appearing, miraculous curings,..), and all the logical things/science that serves an independent observer's mind. To be caught somewhere in the middle strikes me as more positive than belonging to just one religion. And in this sense, I find more answers and take more responsibility than placing it all to one god.

Aside from this point, the movie poses the existence of a devil and of course, on the other hand god. Exorcism course should be the one equipping young enthusiasts with weapon to defeat him/her, of course placed in picturesque Rome. The young priest is the voice of the viewer, and Hopkins is one interesting voice of belief, because in one breath he rejects all the divine (you need to believe in this) mumbo jumbo; in another, he's the true voice of christianity. The scenes with exorcism are really impressively put together, although for the reason stated above, they will leave all the atheists (or most of them) cold in their feet and soul.

So, all in all I find this movie to be truly a commercial issue speaking for the church and making a crowd at Sunday masses, rather than sound of reason, making true options what to solve (or what is to be solved). Are the people, that claim to be posessed, merely psychological cases - with a severe shizofrenia for instance? The movie doesn't pose an answer, just makes me question more.


My personal rating: 5,0 (for all the thinking post festum. Generally, I like movies to make me think about one or two points. Nevertheless, the execution in this perticular piece is not extremely well).

The Rite on IMDB