templar77099 Reviews

Sicario (2015)

Breathtaking

[8/10 · 10 February 2018]

Simply brutal. It grabs you by the collar and throws you around without any mercy or compassion and does not give you a mere split second to get your breath back. Just like Mercer, you're very much left in the dark throughtout the majority of the runtime and that really helps building tension and making you feel at unease. "Sicario" doesn´t spare anything , it shoots it all against the wall wether you like it or not.

"(...) and this is the land of wolves now".

Brawl in Cell Block 99 (2017)

Stop Making Sense

[6/10 · 10 February 2018]

Unfortunately, for me,"Brawl" becomes too gratuitous for its own good, specially if we take into consideration the grounded and realistic way its plot is built throughout the first half. I can understand all the violence and was completely jawdropped during the action scenes - Zahler really knows how to get the most in terms of phisicality and impact - but by the end it all devolved into something that was a bit too much - enough to hurt my global appreciation and immersion. With that said, I know recognise that I must watch "Bone Tomahawk" and follow closely "Dragged Across Concrete" because Zahler appears to be a very gifted director. The resurging Vince Vaughn will certainly deliver just as he did in this one. Really looking forward for it.

War for the Planet of the Apes (2017)

The Usual Blockbuster

[6/10 · 10 February 2018]

Well, that was a bit of a letdown. It´s not a bad film by any means, but my whole perception of the trilogy is now not as untouchable as it was. I might have to rewatch "Rise" and "Dawn", but, apart from the effects and the performances, specially Andy Serkis - he really is out of this world - there's not much else to hold the film, that really suffers from a thin plot where many incongruences can be found. Its what you'd expect from a tentpole blockbuster but it can elevate itself beyond that so keep that in mind if you're gonna give it a watch.

Dunkirk (2017)

The clock's ticking

[9/10 · 7 August 2017]

Dunkirk is without a doubt my favourite cinema experience of the year so far. I mean, thats not that hard to achieve since in 2017 the only films I've watched in the theatre were John Wick 2, Ghost in the Shell, Spider Homecoming, the more recent Transformers (bleh, bleh, bleh) and Despicable Me 3 (yeah, I did). The rest of it were at home. And although John Wick and Spidey were very good flicks, they weren't as gripping and intense as Nolan's Dunkirk. You know you're in for a ride from very first shot. In two minutes it's already kicking the fan. When we reach the beach and see what many have to do in order to survive comes the sudden realisation of the hopeleness and the miracle that needs to happen to bring all of those soldiers back home. The three separate timelines were just perfect to brilliantly tell this story. The mesh so well and make the film fell fluid and dynamic, always moving, interconnecting events and characters, almost like chapters of a book. We don't get to know much of the characters but I believe that what we're given is enough to figure out ourselves some of the backstory and motivations of the characters. The collective is what's a stake here. We might be confused when trying to identify who's who, specially on the big setpieces, but that just adds to viscerality and intensity Dunkirk excels in delivering. Both the photography and soundtrack are amazing. One friend of mine jokingly told me a few das ago that the music just wouldn't stop and became ad eternum. I didn't know what make of this, but believe that if it was well executed, Nolan could do whatever he wanted. Spoiler - it was. The OST makes for the lack of dialogue - yes, this is almost a silent film - and elevates the action and the stakes. It fits like a glove into the overall tone of Dunkirk. Actingwise is very solid - shoutout to Styles who really held his ground and turned a surprisingly convincing performance. Hardy is brief but gets the hang of it. The rest of the cast is quite good, with many of the actors being unknown, another factor that contributes to establish the collective over the individual.

Got to give it to Nolan.

Kong: Skull Island (2017)

Good popcorn Cinema

[6/10 · 7 August 2017]

Cool, neat, stylish, but not much more. It certainly fell a bit short, specially considering the source material it had to work upon. Visually it is quite interesting, though sometimes a bit oversaturated in colour. With that said, half of its scenes were a bit overdone and overstylized and its no good. I mean, most of the characters scenes seemed like this - "Oh, we're cool, lets make badass poses to the slow-mo". And its just that, for almost two hours. To make it justice, it does feauture an awesome soundtrack - but its the 70s, how could they go wrong? . Its a fun decent blockbuster but it ends there. Kong was the great attraction of it - they didn't hide him, just put him in the open and that was a very good decision. The mega-fights are also quite entertaining and give you a big sense of scale and intensity.

King Arthur: Legend of the Sword (2017)

Average

[6/10 · 7 August 2017]

Well, its what you'd expect from a spring blockbuster plus Richie's own unique style and flair. I just don't know why it was so poorly received. Its by no means a masterpiece but on the other hand, its quite distant from being a worthless piece of cinema. Its enjoyable at times, specially in the Excalibur bit - until the moment, by the second moment Arthur uses it, that you realise the effects are absolute crap that came from a ten year old video game.

Gets points for the humour and the coolness - all of those are inherent to Charlie Hunnam, although his performance is, most of the time, just average - but nothing more.

Logan (2017)

Logan is another level

[8/10 · 12 June 2017]

The best X-Men film alongside First Class. It felt gritty, it felt real with a sense of dread and hopelessness you don't often see in this comic-book blockbuster adaptations. It should be praised for doing things differently and really pushing the edge with what can or can't be done in the genre. The triangle between Logan, Charles and Laura works as the driving force of the plot, and is very well developed. Logan's character arch is quite pleasant to watch, though obviously predictable. With that said, the acting is clearly masterclass. You can feel the dilemmas, the emotions and feelings that the characters are put through, specially those three. And another thing it does really well is alluding to a previous event - the Charles incident - but never fully explaining it to the audience, leaving you wondering. The action is nothing like you'd expect from a tenthpole - the R rating really makes up for wonders - being quite visceral and impactful. "Logan" probably deserved a better villain, although one could argue that the real villain here is not the typical multinational corporation, but the inner demons of the characters. Demons that prevent them from living albeit normal and somewhat stable life.

The Belko Experiment (2016)

Sad for it being just average

[5/10 · 11 June 2017]

After watching I do believe that "The Belko Experiment" would've been a much better film overall under the direction of James Gunn. I don't think Greg McLean does full justice to Gunn's script and the "Experiment" fell a bit short, at least for me. Its not a bad movie in any aspect but for me it lacked the extra detail and effort to make it something above average. The acting is just fine. Aside from the main character Mike - played by John Gallagher, Jr - who I found a bit cringy and sufferable to watch from time to time - everyone seems to know what they're doing - shoutout to Tony Goldwyn, Adria Ajorna and John C. McGinley who for me, where the best of the bunch. Another big positive for me was the soundtrack. I've grown quite fond of Tyler Bates since watching John Wick 2 and he excels once more at creating tension and urgency. With all of that said, "The Belko Experiment" was a bit of a let down - the major plot point was left incompletely unexplained and the sequel? teaser at the end didn't make it for me. They should've been more smart and inventive, otherwise we are only left with an hour and an half of gore just for gore's sake.

The Trust (2016)

Average at best

[4/10 · 27 April 2017]

Average at best. The final act had some twists and turns, making it the best bit of the film, but still, the rest of it is not that strong. It isn't that weak though. "The Trust" relies significantly on the dynamic of the main duo - Cage and Wood - and for the most part they do a good job. Cage portrays his typical character - an apparent ordinary man that increasingly becomes darker and dubious. Wood is the one that keeps both of their feet in the ground, in a more contained role, still pulling it off rather good. This is a film you'll only watch because of this two, specially because, apart from this two, there's no much to see and that is, probably, the major flaw of "The Trust". There are no side-characters - apart from Stone's (Cage) father, played by Jerry Lewis, that has only around 1 minute of screen time. "The Trust" had some potential. There's no need to say that most of it was lost.

The Boondock Saints (1999)

Quite a good watch

[8/10 · 25 April 2017]

Quite a good watch. Had never heard of it until a couple days ago - on a Screen Junkies video - and since it was being praised and Willem Dafoe, I decided to give it try. Dafoe is exactly the best part of it. Over the top, funny and really full-on crazy, his character carries the whole film not letting it turn boring and stale. Another fresh idea are the flashbacks. I wasn't expecting they'd choose this route to illustrate the most of the action scenes and it surely delivers. It's very interesting to look at the crime scene and at the same time as the cops, try to find out what happened. Unlike what I've seen written about this specific part of the film, it's not like it gets too much repetitive since as Smecker is closer to finding out who are "The Saints" he too gets incorporated in this action scenes, in quite spectacular fashion. The rest of the cast, specially Reedus, Flanery and the first-timer Della Rocco also make for interesting performances, despite not at the same level. The film is visceral, "balls to the wall" and certainly feels fresh, with some inventive camera work and choreography. The action scenes felt gripping and somewhat intense.

Recommended

Paterson (2016)

A nice little gem

[8/10 · 23 April 2017]

Such a nice little gem. My first watch of a Jim Jarmusch film and now I'm quite eager to get into his filmography. An appreciation on routine, I tried to find a plot within the first 20 minutes, only to realise the plot was nothing more than what was unraveling on-screen - the everyday life of Paterson. Adam Driver completely steals this. From watching "The Force Awakens" I viewed him as a decent actor, but after this I can clearly say that he's very very good at what he does. Paterson is very hard to read and I ended up the film not knowing whether he is happy or incredibly frustrated with his life. That's what really makes you think - specially because of the way it ends. I was 100% absorbed during the film, and that's what really sold me. You get pulled into this world that's so intriguing and enigmatic and you are left wondering about it.

A must-watch

The One I Love (2014)

An Amazing Directorial Debut

[8/10 · 22 April 2017]

Such a terrific experience. Went in not knowing a single thing about it, except for the part it was kind of a romantic dramedy and was really surprised. "The One I Love" wasn't really the kind of film I was expecting and that's what probably made me like it so much. Carried by the two leads (the both excellent Mark Duplass and Elisabeth Moss) this is one of those few films where you don't get sick of watching always the same actors on-screen. In fact, the constrained setting makes it much fresh. The soundtrack also factored heavily to create a somewhat creepy and weird atmosphere that the story really benefits from. "The One I Love" can be creepy and extremely charming almost at the some time, and you'll find yourself wondering why some things are happening. Despite leaving some questions unanswered, the film still holds up pretty well and is definitely worthwatching.

An amazing directorial debut for Charlie Mcdowell.

The Great Wall (I) (2016)

Below average

[4/10 · 20 April 2017]

Well, this was bad. Not the worst, but still, I had some expectations. I was looking for something light to watch and "The Great Wall" made the bill, but still, I don't think I'd make the same decision now, because its being quite hard to decide whether this was worth of my time. First things first, the imagery was the best aspect of the film. Some striking shots, mostly recourring to CGI, were well made. But here comes the first problem : inconsistency - some CGI shots were good, but most were so fake and poorly made. I can't understand how they achieved this gripping difference in terms of quality. The acting is bad. I can't understand what Matt Damon is doing here. Pedro Pascal is probably the best bit of it - specially if you have seen him as Oberyn in GoT. The rest of the cast is not that good, even Willem Dafoe. The action was average, with some good concepts here and there. The OST was the other positive. It contributed to give the film the epic scale it was looking for.

Ultimately, I can't quite recommend this one. You can watch it, sure, and you might like, but it just didn't do it for me.

On Her Majesty's Secret Service (1969)

Lazenby should've had another go

[7/10 · 19 April 2017]

I had been wanting to watch OHMSS for ages. I had seen bits and pieces throughout my childhood but never sat down to watch it all the way through. I always heard this wasn't a great movie but that recently had again somewhat of cult status for Bond fans, specially since it was the only Bond appearance of George Lazenby. I must say I quite enjoyed it. Its such a beautiful film - the cinematography is really a staple of the Bond series - and probably one of the best at it. Although Lazenby is not the best performer, the cast around him, specially Diana Rigg and Telly Savalas, really make this a very fun watch, and I must admit the last scene impacted me - not to Craig's CR standards - and was the most convincing thing he did on screen. You could really feel the pain and sadness. The action scenes, though quite dated - with jump cuts and changes of pace - still feels brutal and intense in some places, and I think that physicality really was the strongest suit of Lazenby's Bond. The slow pace throughout the film really paid off in the last half an hour. The Bond series holds a very special place in my heart, and OHMSS is no exception. The excitement of listening to the Bond theme during a set piece is an unique feeling on all cinema.

OHMSS is a treat to watch.

For Your Eyes Only (1981)

One of Moore's Era Best

[6/10 · 19 April 2017]

Not the typical Moore era film. After "Moonraker" the direction taken was more serious and realistic. "For Your Eyes Only" takes a lot of queues from "OHMSS" and I quite enjoyed it. It drags a bit, and surely it could have benefited from a shorter running-time but it still makes for a pleasant watch. Moore is really at ease in the character at this point, and you can see that he's just having such a good time playing Bond. The very well crafted action set-pieces make up for the somewhat thin plot and its interesting to see how the franchise constantly evolved, entry after entry, technically wise in order to remain fresh and appealing. Although not anywhere near greatness when comes to acting, Carole Bouquet still makes for a compelling Bond Girl. The all around cast is quite a good ensemble.

"For Your Eyes Only" is one of the better Moore films and still holds up as a good action piece up to this day.

The Founder (2016)

Good, but not Great

[7/10 · 19 April 2017]

A good film, but not great. Its quite solid all the way through, with the acting being its greatest feat. Michael Keaton absolutely carries it with so finesse and distinction. He really is a great actor. Nick Offerman and John Carrol Lynch complete the flick's main triangle and the three have such good performances, really making for a compelling arch. While Being very competent, "The Founder" doesn't bring anything more to the table, becoming a by the books biopic very quickly. Nevertheless, its a solid feature, and one that I was eager to see for the last month or so. It didn't disappoint me, but, on the other hand, it didn't really surprise me, aside from some shining moments sprinkled throughout, but I'm afraid that in few weeks I won't remember anything of it. Probably its greatest flaw is being a bit forgettable.

Still, give it a watch.

Collide (I) (2016)

Not as bad as some painted it

[5/10 · 12 April 2017]

Not as bad as I was expecting. Brainless, with almost no plot whatsoever, but still made up for an enjoyable ride. Had some inventing camera work, but not really anything beyond generic. The action setpieces were by the book, as were the performances. Ben Kingsley and Anthony Hopkins are so over the top that it hurts, but the outlandish nature of their roles still makes the film funnily watchable. A simple and straightforward rethread of genre tropes that still ends up being, if not worthwatching, a all and all decent film.

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (2016)

It certainly lives up to Potter

[7/10 · 20 November 2016]

Well, I had not that much of expectations for "Fantastic Beasts" upon viewing. I like the Harry Potter franchise (my favourite is The Prisoner of Azkaban) but I can't consider myself a big fan. I regard the Potter films as quite good features on their own merit. With that said, I was pleasantly entertained with "Beasts". I don't if it was the quirky acting (specially from Redmayne, Waterson and Sudol) or the astounding VFX work, but I can assure you this one is worth your money.

Plot-wise it is fairly linear and simple. It surely gains from J.K.Rowling involvement. My only issue is with one of the two major twists you will find here. The Credence one, I dunno if it happened to everybody but I kinda saw it coming - there was so much focus on is little sister that I became kinda sick of it, and was like, oh stop it already, it isn't her. The Graves one I can't say it caught me by surprise, cause I was finding some of his actions quite strange and abnormal. All and all, its a good plot that still gives some throwbacks to the Potter franchise - Dumbledore and Leta Lestrange being the most blunt and direct.

Directorial-wise its not that impressive. The way David Yates drives "Beasts" is quite normal and risk-free. He simply follows the formula.

During its 2h13min runtime there is always lots of exposition - who is this? what is that? how does it work - but it never feels saturated or boring. The characters are quite likable and the dynamic established between them is as unique as only Rowling could write it.

Do yourself a favour and go enjoy yourself with this one.

Suicide Squad (2016)

Silly and Choppy

[6/10 · 11 August 2016]

Let me just start by saying that "Suicide Squad" was, among Batman V Superman one of the films I wanted to watch the most this year. And now that I've watched it, I can tell you that while financially it might turn out a bigger hit than what we previously thought, it isn't the hit that the DCEU needed to clear all doubts and ghosts after Dawn of Justice. I can't hide it, I'm a big DC fan, Batman is my favourite comic-book hero and I grew up watching Nolan's Trilogy. Maybe Nolan set a very high-bar on other comic book films to follow and when I go to the theater to watch anything DC-related, I wanna come out surprised and happy. With Suicide Squad, although that happened to some extent, I was much more prone to wonder on how much did the so call suits interfere with the process of making this one, because, although David Ayer has repeatedly stated that this is HIS cut (the contrary would definitely cause some turmoil), I believe he had a somewhat different vision for this months ago.

Let me just say that contrary to what I've listened and read from some reviewers, the first half hour of the film was very painful to watch for me. The way the presented each member of the squad (not each because they inexplicably forgot Spliknot - even if he's appearance in all of this is very brief) seemed so wrong and out-of-place. Ayer's first idea, at least from what I gather was not to have the flashy flashbacks, opting for a linear presentation instead. I don't know why this was removed, but I think this way it would've been much better. The poor editing didn't help it at all and I often found myself wondering why they'd make it this way, which was, at least for me, childish sometimes.

After that point I honestly enjoyed the film, and I realised I was doing so on the first big action scene, when the Squad fights the faceless hordes of "zombies" spawned by Enchantress and her brother. Deadshot climbing on top of a car and clearing out the street was simply amazing.

Major thumbs up for the casting department. I don't know how Tom Hardy would turn out as Rick Flagg but let me say that Joel Kinnaman fits the role very well. Nothing to say about Margot Robbie, Will Smith, Jai Courtney, Jay Hernandez, Viola Davis and Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje cause the really seemed like they were born to play their role.

The two major biggies I had with this:

--- The Villain ---

Cara Delevingne is a fine actress for me, but Enchantress is blend and clichéd as the villain. Lack of motivation, no character development, just the same old game we've been seeing for the past decade.

Its the convention, and since this movie revolves around the Worst Heroes Ever, one would thought they'd find a more developed and well built villain to pose a threat.

--- The Joker ---

I've seen many criticizing Leto, I've seen many worshiping him but right now, I can't quite make my mind about his performance. He has already stated that many scenes of his character were cut, scenes that had even been incorporated on the trailers (suits meddling?) and I guess I'll have to wait for is next on-screen presence to decide.

You're not going to watch this for the plot , you're going to watch this for the spectacle. That's why you're buying the ticket.

Enjoy

The Bourne Supremacy (2004)

Better than Identity

[8/10 · 2 August 2016]

In my efforts to prepare myself to "Jason Bourne" I've started binge-watching all the films in the series. Although I liked "The Bourne Identity" very much, I think "Supremacy" is above it. It expands and builds upon the first one's foundations and, since, there was a director change, the film feels very fresh and unique. I know some movie-goers don't appreciate Greengrass's camera work, I don't think we can label it as "shaky-cam" because that would be an injustice. I've seen flicks which use this kind of technique very abusively, specially in fight scenes, mostly to hide the fact that, in fact, stunt-men are doing it. But, in Bourne, I don't get that feeling. In this particular case its just the director's choice, not a constraint. It helps to give the film a unique look and cinematography.

In this one they've upped the ante, specially on action scenes. Karl Urban's "Kirill" is a welcoming addition to the already established set of characters, working as a match to Bourne. The nods to the first entry are also very interesting and serve to expand on Bourne's backstory and the quest for his identity. Matt Damon once again is perfect as the tichilor character, bringing toughness and intelligence to this mysterious man. The returning cast does its job, specially Brian Cox's "Ward Abbot" who plays a more pivotal role compared to "Identity". Joan Allen's "Pamela Landy" is also an interesting addition to the film, giving it even more women power.

The edginess and realism brought to this whole affair is distinctive and helps setting the whole series apart from other stories within the spy genre. Although, I'm a James Bond fanboy, since I've started to watch Bourne I've grown quite fond of the series specially for its authenticity and outside the box plot, acting and action.

Recommended.

Recommended.

Ex Machina (2014)

Have you ever heard of the Turing Test?

[9/10 · 28 June 2016]

I really hate myself for just having watched this one last weekend. It is incredibly good and at certain points mind-blowing with all of it's ideas and messages.

I knew I was in for a good treat cause I was aware of the buzz concerning "Ex Machina". All the reviews said it was amazing and everyone I talked about this told me I really needed to watch it. Now that I did I can't quite stop thinking about the plot and some of the implications.

The characters are very well constructed. The tension between the main triangle - Caleb, Ava and Nathan - had me nervous throughout the whole film. The way they interact and speak - specially since Ava is an quite an different AI from what we're accostumed to see it this kind of story - is full of subtlety and calculism. Deception is a major part of the game and if you can master it you've the power.

Domhall Gleeson as confirmed himself, at least at my eyes, as one of the best young actors out there, even one of the best of his generation alongside Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Jennifer Lawrence and Miles Teller. The way he delivers a little bit of quirkiness to this role is quite enjoyable. He's a conflicted man attracted to a machine, torn apart between love and fear.

Oscar Isaac continues to impress as Nathan and its really hard to believe that actor with his chops has been in the spotlight for such a short time.

Alicia Vikander really stoods out here as Ava. And she's the real queen of deception. The way she conveys feelings and thoughts is notable, and the whole performance is "au point". Really, the casting department made the best choice it could have done. This still young-aged actress is really gonna blow out in the years to come.

Also a big thumbs up for Sonoya Mizuno as Kyoko. She hasn't one single line throughout the whole film but she really knows how to act physically and lets just say that this role was given to someone who couldn't quite do what she does, the whole experience would be damaged.

Finally, I need to praise Alex Garland's and his team's vision. Being its debut as a director he performed like a seasoned expert in sci- fi. This is the guy who pinned the breakout "Dredd" and he really knows how to pull the strings and immerse the watcher. Really hoping to see more from him in the future, specially since he's adapting Jeff VanderMeer's novel "Annihilation" to the big screen.

Is there anything else to be said?

X-Men: Apocalypse (2016)

First Class is still the best

[7/10 · 26 May 2016]

I had moderate expectations for Apocalypse. I'm not a big fan of the first X-Men Trilogy but since First Class, in 2011, I've grown to like this franchise very much. First Class was and still is the best of the bunch for me. My moderate expectations came from the fact that I believe Days of a Future Past fell a bit short in comparison with FC, but I still enjoyed it a whole lot. Bryan Singer is not one of my favourite directors and since he established this franchise, I guess his films lack the boldness and freshness that Matthew Vaughn brought to the series.

Now it's time to review Apocalypse. The first sequences of it were mind-blowing. Egypt, an old Apocalypse putting his consciousness on a newer body, the False God fighters and the colapse of the pyramids were just amazing to watch. Then it settles a bit and starts building-up to the final clash between Apocalypse and the X-Men.

Despite roughly being 2 and an half hours long, I never felt it was dragging or boring. The action scenes were great and the more character development bit were fine. A big shout-out to the casting team : both Tye Sheridan and Sophie Turner were impeccable as the new Cyclops and Jean Grey.

Oscar Isaac as I feared was only average as Apocalypse and the new actors didn't bring much to the table - Olivia Munn is sexy, yes, but not much more than that. Magneto, Prof. Xavier and Raven are the standouts once more. After three entries I feel connected to their characters in way I'm not with the others. Charle's and Erik's ideological fight drives the plot as it did on the previous films and Apocalypse gives more attention to Michael Fassbender's character pain and grief. Fassbender is really the best of the film. He acts so perfectly. He truly is Magneto. Above else, he is Erik Lensherr. Evan Peter's Quicksilver continues to steal every scene he's in and the slow-motion sequences are one of the best bits of the film.

Plotwise, its what you'd expect from a big super-hero blockbuster. Simple and clichied, but it still works for the fun factor. We're gonna see this film to be entertained for 2:30 hours and nothing more. Its a popcorn flick and its what you think it is. Oh, and there's a very very sweet cameo in the middle which blew my mind.

I just don't know if it deserves the RT rating. Its certainly better than 49%. But will it be alongside Wolverine 3, the last we see of X-Men in the future?

I hope not. Specially, if another director with fresh ideas is on board.

The Day After Tomorrow (2004)

Just Another Disaster Flick

[4/10 · 2 May 2016]

"The Day After Tomorrow" is the typical clichéd disaster flick. There's destruction, there's fake tension and there's build up to a climax which falls quite short of the expectations created by its first half. The film gradually loses its scale, from being a global disaster fest o a more focused and somewhat dull piece. The only two things that redeem this whole nonsense are the special effects and Dennis Quaid's and Jake Gyllenhaal's performances, which can be over the top sometimes, but quite decent, in general.

The effects are up to par with the best in the genre, even for today's standards, although they can seem a bit video game-like sometimes. Aside from these two factors, you won't find major quality in this work.

The direction is what we've come to expect from Emmerich. In other words, balls to the wall action and disaster, with nothing more than a thin logical line driving the plot and the character's actions and motivations.

Ultimately, the film drags for too long and becomes far too USA focused for any foreigner watcher to relate.

Not the most enjoyable watch, but still worth of your time as a ten-year old disaster film with pretty decent VFX.

The Martian (2015)

Space Pirate

[8/10 · 18 October 2015]

I had moderate expectations for "The Martian" and the film exceeded them. It wasn't a perfect movie by any means but, at least for me, it was entertaining and worth-watching. The scrip is fairly well-written and the direction is quite good too (specially in the Habitat/Mars set scenes) but what really stood out to me were the delivered performances.

Starting with Matt Damon. He is an excellent actor! He was a so-so for me(I never completely saw the Bourne trilogy nor Good Will Hunting) until yesterday. I knew he had the chops but I didn't relate to him as much as I relate to other actors and actresses. He is so good playing the part of Mark Watney. You believe in him and you care for the character and you feel the sense of desperation when everything seems to go wrong. Above all, I related to him. I don't know if any other actor could pull this specific role off and I believe Damon was the perfect casting choice.

Then we have Jessica Chastain. She is having a meteoric rise since 2010/2011, specially after Zero Dark Thirty. I find her to be an amazing actress, from "Mama" to "The Help" she is just superb. Whatever role she plays, we know we're in for a treat.

Aside from these two we have an ensemble cast filled with A-plus performers. Jeff Daniels as NASA director turns to a more serious and darker role, Michael Peña is the film's comic relief and he does it extremely well, Chiwetel Ejiofor is as good as always, Kate Mara and Sebastian Stan, take a huge part in the movie climax and they're performances are flawless. Aksel Hennie is also quite good, washing away his performance on "Last Knights",

Despite having less screen time is always amazing to see Kristen Wiig and Sean Bean. I was not aware Bean had a role in the film until I saw him sitting at a desk and it was a lovely surprise.

The technical effects are well-achieved, at least for me, although Matt 's body near the end seems really CGI and wasn't as polished as I think it should have been. The end to me was a bit "fairy-tally" but I'm good with it.

"The Martian" shines due to the performances of its cast and through some breathtaking scenes in Mars (Watney's performing surgery on himself was gasp-taking). An good effort from Ridley Scott on the sci-fi genre but I don't quite know if it should be recognized as an Oscar Contender.

Elite Squad (2007)

Brazil's Best

[7/10 · 19 September 2015]

"Elite Squad" is one of my favourite movies of all time. I saw it for the first time a couple of years ago and yesterday I rewatched it. And I back then I liked it a lot, this time, I loved it. Its a rough and realist depiction of the inner Rio de Janeiro, where cops and drug dealers take part on a never-ending war for the favela's dominance.

Within the law enforcers side we are presented to three major characters - Captain Nascimento (played by Wagner Moura, the best Brazilian actor from my point of view), and the both aspirants to be cops Neto and Matias. Nascimento is the main character of the two movies and he couldn't be played by a better actor. Moura delivers a performance of a troubled anti-hero, who wants to retire from BOPE (Brazil's special law enforcers) to spend more time with his wife and his future son. Moura is so believable and real that we all tend to love him, despite some of the dubious actions he performs throughout the story. He's a conflicted man, who just leaves when he feels his duty is fulfilled. "A given mission, is an accomplished one".

Neto (played by Caio Junqueira) and Matias (played by André Ramiro) are also deeply explored on the plot, with the first being a younger version of Nascimento, reckless and motivated by his sense of justice and duty, while Matias is a young man split between two worlds - the one of the law enforcers and the one of the drug dealers.

The directing of José Padilha really leveled the movie up. The sense of tension and pressure is present in the way he shoots the scenes, with the use of over the shoulder angles and a bit of shaky cam on some chases. The firefights are perfectly shot and Rio is showed at its best and worst.

The film was produced by the Weinstein brothers which solely gives it distinction amongst other productions.

A must-watch.