Change Your Image
ignacioazurdiacr
Reviews
Alien: Covenant (2017)
Wait, the Alien franchise was about the threat itself of its aliens or a Terminator rip-off? And what a waste that this didn't add continuity to Prometheus main premise.
Was it necessary a sequel to Prometheus (2012) that just kills off the existencial premise that made it intriguing for one that makes the Aliens less interesting by themselves?
Why detach the intrigue and scariness of the Alien itself and give it to a resentful droid? Was the saga about the power of an Alien species or a critique to the extends of technology?
Was this an Alien movie or a Terminator rip-off?
And what was that nonsense near the end of going out of the flying ship to kill the Alien? Where did that spontaneous Wonder Woman bravery come from for Daniels? I get it, the script needed a reason to give one classic fight between the female lead and the Alien like they had on the original saga, but come on, give us a more believable motivation (like the mother instincts of Ripley in Aliens, 1986).
Besides, that final showdown in Aliens (1986) using practical effects and animatronics still looks way better than the crappy CGI that they used in this.
It even looks worse than in Prometheus 5 years before!
Plus, the conception of the first species of the aliens is awful in comparison with the aliens we learned to fear and love (well, the famous one at the end didn't look so good either). It's a shame they rely so much on CGI instead of animatronics.
In its final minutes, we can testify that the movie returns to the classic Alien formula with the "hunting" of the "monster" aboard the ship and the whole shabang, but leaving the droid as the main antagonist (and not developing at all the superior race that was discovered in Prometheus) is a huge let down.
I'm gonna chose to believe that Ridley Scott was drunk or something when he decided to do this, cause what a way of screwing up a great saga that started with his own Alien in 1979.
Prometheus (2012)
Interesting take from the same director that brought us the original Alien, but even though it's better in many ways, it still lacks in suspense and a more believable ending.
"Prometheus" serves well as a prequel for the Alien saga and it clearly replicates the franchise formula: The discovery voyage (with a more detailed cause and interesting existential premise), the robot with the hidden agenda, the corporate greed and, of course, the in-body alien. Plus, it has subtext that the others didn't have.
But, even though the introduction to the plot and its buildup seems pretty good in the first 90 minutes, the ending feels far fetched because of the non believable "secondary" characters motivations to act as kamikazes. Besides, you can't empathize with them because the movie doesn't develop them, so we really don't know who they are (apart, of course, from David and Elizabeth Shaw, whom are more developed than any other character from the original Alien saga).
Adding to that, it clearly doesn't wants to scare you like the original saga did but to make you wonder if the existencial premise could be real. For that, it's an interesting take, but it could have being more suspenseful.
So, this massive production, with beautiful panoramics, good CGI, meaningful dialogues and great acting from Michael Fassbender, lifts up most of its running time to deflate a little bit near the end.
It's a shame, cause even though that happens -and I'm sorry if it hurts nostalgia feelings-, it's still a better movie than Alien 1 in 1979. And that being from the same director with, of course, far more experience (Ridley Scott was 41 years old in the first movie and 75 with this one).
Alien Resurrection (1997)
Better than Alien 3, slightly more original than the first ones, re-watchable iconic moments, but its dialogue and acting make it look like a satire.
This one is slightly more original than the formulaic script of the first three; even though the main premise of the "dual" cloning is far fetched.
It also wraps up pretty good the corporate/scientific greed shown throughout the whole saga (and makes a necessary critique of the lack of ethic limitations).
But, there are moments (specially when hell gets loose), that the cartoonish acting and dialogue make it look like a satire (specially with overconfident alien-Ripley).
So, you don't know how serious you can take this movie; including the moments that try to be funny but they're just isn't or the ilogical ones like the dreadlocks guy being unable to keep climbing the ladder because of a little acid on his face but still can let go of his straps to make a dramatic, but pointless, suicide.
However, it also have iconic moments that make it re-watchable, like the underwater aliens, the mega alien queen and the sad finale (yes, sad... Poor baby!).
Also, the camera work precisely works (and pretty well), the animatronics of the aliens are state of the art and the cgi it's not that bad (showing an improvement compared to the awful digital effects in Alien 3).
In sum, it's a pretty entertaining and re-watchable movie of the franchise, but, please, just let Ripley die (or be dead) in peace.
Alien³ (1992)
Basically the same story from the first two with a worse scenario, bad secondary characters and a finale that keeps it's predecessor (Aliens) as the best one out of the three.
But first things first... how the hell did that huge baby alien came out of that smaller dog?!
Watching the Alien movies is like watching the same story in different scenarios (the same beginning, the same buildup, the same "let's organize to kill it" -with the building plans in hand-, the same corporate greed, the same -in this case potential- white collar traitor and, of course, the same Ripley heroic action at the end -only that this time got more help-).
The differences in storytelling between the three first movies depend on who's directing it. With this one, you can tell the David Fincher style, specially in its tone, camera work and edition.
But, why a prison? What's appealing about a prison? You can't empathize too much with a place full of despiteful characters apart from the great Charles Dance, playing Clemens, and Ripley herself (well, at least this one has some character development, not like the ones before).
Also, they should have stick with the animatronics throughout the whole movie, cause the cgi Alien looks really bad.
In sum, this one fells like the typical action sequel that doesn't add much besides a supposedly closure for Ripley (cause we know what happened in the next one).
Meanwhile, Aliens (1986) keeps being the one that stands out between the original three with the best ending out of all (and also a better production value using less modern technology).
Aliens (1986)
Way better than the first one with, also, an incredible ending.
Aliens (1986) has, obviously, a much better production value than the first one in 1979.
The storyline is similar to the original (a let's get into trouble trip, the chain in command shenanigans, the corporate greed and badass Ripley at the end). But what an ending it has.
Aliens can be criticized for its derivative story -it could have given us something more original, even though it's a sequel (and a more convincent reason for Ripley to be involved again)-, or for its almost inexistent character development (besides the expected Ripley arc) and the cartoonish secondary characters, but it's a pretty well done production.
The sets, the aliens themselves and, in general, the visual effects look amazing for a mid 80s movie.
And, c'mon, the last third is amazing with Ripley entering the queen's lair and, from then on, the epic battle of the mothers.
In the end, Aliens (1986) is a huge upgrade from Alien (1979) and we have to thank James Cameron for that (but also for making the best sci-fi movie of all times: Terminator 2).
Alien (1979)
Don't let nostalgia fool you, it's good for an Alien introduction, but a poor movie in its execution.
The art production is amazing and the camera work, plus the great soundtrack, succeds in building tension and suspense.
But, Alien (1) lacks in character development and, mostly, in fluidity and attention to detail in its storytelling. The edition in the first half makes it look like an old vhs that keeps jumping forward leaving behind unseen parts that are important to understand the development of the story (plus the merging of practical effects on scenes looks like a low budget school project; even for a 1979 movie).
Eitherway, you have to see it to introduce yourself to a great villain like Alien, but it is enough watching it once. The sequels are another (and better) story.
PD. The best actor was the cat. What an amazing expression when the grown alien appears for the first time.
Titanic (1997)
What else do you need in movie? C'mon, what a (love) story!
What's missing in this mega production?
It has pretty much everything: A beautiful love story surrounded by a well crafted art production that moves between drama, suspense, comedy, horror and, also, a lot of necessary social critique.
Plus, the music. That gorgeous soundtrack that makes you dive in to the storytelling without a breath while forgetting it's more than 3 hours long.
And, yeah, it can be a little bit far fetched sometimes and unbelievable in others, but I'll let James Cameron tell me stories anytime (thanks to him we've had unforgettable movies like the best sci-fi film of all times, a.k.a. "Terminator 2").
In sum, Titanic is a highly watchable and re-re-re watchable movie.
Die Hard (1988)
A very-very good movie that still holds up 36 years later, but that could have been way better
Iconic scenes and one liners, good camera work, great scenery for an 80s movie, solid acting (specially by the late Alan Rickman), funny stuff (specially the not related FBI Johnsons) and, of course, it gave a lot of material for actual pop culture.
The only "but" is its plot armour. And yeah, I get it; it had to be like that for 1 guy making it against a whole lot, but... The shooting scenes could have been more believable, not a stormtroopers aiming disability kind of movie (including the FBI idiot shooting with a sniper scope from the helicopter).
In sum, Die Hard is an action packed, filled with twists, highly entertaining movie that still holds up in the 21st century, but even if it's a very-very good 1988 production, it still could have been way better.
(500) Days of Summer (2009)
Very fresh and insightful take of a romcom. The only thing missing is Summer's perspective (in a sequel).
What else is there to say about this movie?
It's a very fresh take of romcoms, with a great script and an even greater edition pace that traps you from the get go.
The dialogues are funny and witted and, yes, I'm one of the few that ended up on Summer's side (and it's a shame they didn't do a sequel from her perspective).
Tom was in his right to be a hopeless romantic, but she was clear from the beginning that she wasn't looking for anything serious (at least with Tom). If she didn't tell him otherwise, she kept being the same girl with the same mentality from the beginning, even if it appeared she was developing feelings.
So, as Tom learned in the end, and like his sister Rachel would say (being, BTW, the best character in the movie, portrayed masterfully by Chloë Grace Moretz), move on. There's plenty fish in the sea (and, damn, that Autumn was way hotter tan Summer!).
Independence Day (1996)
If you ignore the plot weaknesses and the cartoonish characters (and their development), you get a great action packed movie.
It can be a nauseous "America rules", USA is the center of the Earth, kind of flick, but its also a great action packed movie.
The best of it is its awesome villains introduction (that UFOs sequence with suspense at the beginning is simply art).
The bad side is that its characters are one dimensional (and stereotypical) with corny relationships between them and, overall, a cartoonish character development. Plus, the dialogues are cheesy and there's a huge plot hole or, in other words, a very convenient deus ex machina (the virus or its development) with also a convenient plot armor (the aliens knew about the Area 51 -that's why they were going to attack it- but got fooled by one of their own spacecrafts stored there that their "super advanced technology" couldn't give them a heads up or at least identify their passengers sooner).
Anyways, even though the movie could had better written characters and a better thought sci fi aspect of its story, this is what you look for in an numb-the-mind-just-laid-down-on-the-couch-and-eat-greasy-buttered-popcorn kind of action movie. And taking that into a count, it deserves the status of "classic" entertainment.
30 Days of Night (2007)
Let's just forget this (and also the idea that Josh Hartnett can act).
If you take away the somehow scary scenery, loud music and gore sequences, what you get is a weak story filled with inconsistencies, no character development and no real sense of threat from the antagonists (so, can the "good guys" really die? And, more importantly, who cares if they do?).
Not even the acting can be saved; lead by the appauling Josh Hartnett, who can't show sadness or grief without looking like a nervous little kid on a school play.
And, of course, it ends with a ridiculously far-fetched "twist" (even for a vampire movie).
In sum, let's just forget this movie exists in the horror-vampire genre.
Mortal Kombat (1995)
For a 1995 action movie, it doesn't hold up.
I remember being a kid when I watched this movie for the first time. I loved the MK videogames, so the hype was matched with this movie back then. Plus, the soundtrack was (and still is) pretty awesome.
But the digital effects, from a 21th century point of view -let's say it- are pretty bad.
It's a shame they didn't stick only with animatronics like they did with Goro (who end up being pretty awesome).
Also, with -maybe- the exception of the the Liu Kang vs. Reptile battle and some parts of the final one, the fighting could be better chorographied to be more believable and less campy or cartoonish.
Anyway, it's an entertaining, occasionally funny, 90's action flick, but doesn't deserve more than 1 rewatch to see how it got old... And not in a good way.
Good Will Hunting (1997)
Those dialogues, wow! This movie will make you wanna major in Psychology.
Well deserved Oscars for Best Screenplay by Matt Damon and Ben Affleck, plus the one for Acting by the genius of Robin Williams (RIP).
The majority of the dialogues are brilliant (mainly the ones that involve genuine insights and character development). It even makes you want to major in Psychology!
And, yes, maybe the movie can be perceived a little bit corny sometimes; mostly because of its soundtrack and the rom-com ending, but, come on, it's a 90s movie. And, on that note, it's excellent.
"Every day, I come by your house and I pick you up. And we go out. We have a few drinks and a few laughs, and it's great. But you know what the best part of my day is? For about 10 seconds, from when I pull up to the curb and when I get to your door, 'cause I think maybe I'll get up there and I'll knock on the door and you won't be there. No goodbye. No see you later. No nothing. You just left. I don't know much, but I know that".
La sociedad de la nieve (2023)
Great achievement in drama-action, although the last third feels formulaic and drawn out due to the emotional hangover of the first hour and a half
In general, you can feel the despair and survival efforts of the cast with its very well acted script. Plus, it has the Netflix production value with its credible settings and aerial shots that makes you see the magnitude of their abandonment.
And, of course, the suspense for the pivotal and more tragic moments are very well achieved and directed by Bayona.
Overall, this a very good movie; even though some scenes in the last third of the movie are way too emotionally forced with cookie cutter dialogues and its length seems too long after the emotional hangover of the first two thirds.
PS. The Andes are beautiful. If you haven't seen them in person, you must.
Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania (2023)
Excessive CGI can't hide the fact that Marvel's writers are out of ideas (and that Kathryn Newton is a terrible actress).
It has its few moments (most of them with Jonathan Majors as "Kang"), but the overdone story, with the excessive use of CGI and the very poor acting (and worst scenes) by "Cassie" (Kathryn Newton), makes the movie feel cartoonish and irrelevant; even for a Marvel movie.
And when a derivative script like this (where have I seen this people's revolution vs. The dictator/empire story before?!) offers only expensive computer visuals, we know Hollywood not only has lost its originality but also lost its will to bring something interesting to the table.
In the end, this is just lazy filmmaking (and the conveniently appearance of the ants storyline, plus the Thanos vs Avengers like battle and the "surprising" survival of Kang for a final fight with Ant-Man, is a perfect example of that).
PS. For a Marvel movie, it's not a funny one (not even with Humpty Dumpty Darren).
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004)
Interesting and fresh storytelling for a rom-com... rom-drama? Or is it rom-sci fi?
Interesting and fresh storytelling (and great edition that gives its fluid -entertaining- pace) for a rom-com... I mean, rom-drama. Or is it a rom-sci fi?
Also, solid high profile cast and acting plus great production value in its execution (visual effects and scenery are top tier for a 2004 production).
It's a very good movie, even if the script could have give us a little bit more character development and, in general, more background of the protagonists as a couple so we could feel more invested in both of them beforehand in their journey (not in droplets across the story).
Either way, it ends on a high note with a realistic message about relationships.
Bullet Train (2022)
Typical action packed movie for a numb brain with lazy execution.
Fast paced edition, witty dialogue and a few funny moments, but most of the fight scenes are way too far fetched or conveniently done on "empty" spaces of the train for hours while -oh, shocking!- nobody notice them or even hear something (and, of course, it has an incredibly convenient and ridiculous ending with poor CGI).
But, hey, if you only want to kick back, eat popcorn and numb your brain, this is for you.
PS. Thank Jesus that Bad Bunny dies quickly cause, we get it, he appeals to some younger audiences, but a few seconds on screen of his dumb face and terrible acting is more than enough.
Gran Turismo (2023)
Highly watchable action movie if you ignore some storytelling, character development and acting details
The first 30-45 minutes are disappointing; the acting is cartoonish and the character development is superfluous (plus the romantic side story isn't believable at all); BUT (and it's a big but) when the real driving begins, the movie finds its right lane (with fewer bumps on the road than expected).
Great visuals (plus good CGI) that appeal effectively to gaming nostalgia, the overall experience of speeding and, in general, shows its big production value.
In sum, it's a highly watchable action movie with -of course- a predictable story (basic hero's journey storytelling), carried mainly by David Harbour acting and lines.