Change Your Image
xletxmexgox
Reviews
Titans (2018)
It's bad, folks (Edited for Episode 2)
So, I reviewed this first after watching just the first episode last Friday. And I was incredibly disappointed -completely forgettable scenes, bad acting, worse 'one-liners', a scene ripped straight from 'The Bourne Identity', and an 'edge-factor' so bad it's cringe-worthy left me feeling more disappointed than I've been in a while. But then I watched the second episode, and it got even worse. This is a bit long, and an actual, comprehensive review, so check the bottom for the TL;DR if you want the short and ugly.
Most of the arguments I've seen on these reviews are about how good/bad Starfire is; I find it hard to contribute to this argument, since we see her actually doing stuff for a whopping five minutes, and half of that is just her beating the crap out of some dude in her apartment (again, ala Jason Bourne).
No, I would like to focus on the aspects that many people aren't hitting on.
Let's start with the absolutely terrible dialogue. Teagan Croft's lines are delivered as if she's reading them straight from a script page; there's little to no inflection, the lines themselves are stilted ("My mom doesn't like me to drink coffee" rather than "my mom doesn't want me/doesn't let me/doesn't like it when I drink coffee) is just one example from the top of my head. Her apology for her little mishap in the apartment is easily one of the most wooden lines I've heard delivered in a long time, as if she's a robot. Dove, Hawk, and Dick's partner are a bit better, but only in relation to Raven. Meaning in a room of even semi-competent actors, they'd be the worst, but with her around, they come off as passable. Hawk's 'Jesus' line after Raven's mishap is mind-jarringly wooden, throwing you out of any sort of 'realism' this movie was going for.
This doesn't mean Brenton Thwaites gets a free pass; his acting is passable, but only just, and only in the second episode. In the first, he was as bad as Croft, but there were slight improvements in episode two. He was still either over the top, or underplayed, but at least there was some emotion there this time around.
Then we have the awful camera work; legit, they chose the weirdest angles, with the darkest filter to shoot this show. Half of it is too dark to see anything -to the point where, during the second episode, I wondered for a moment if they got a different actor for Dick Grayson, because it was so weird seeing him in the light. As well, they try for these 'dramatic affect' silences, that actually just come across as awkward, and badly timed, to the point where it's jarring to watch; so even if you are actively trying to get into the show, moments like that yank you back out, making you painfully aware of how awful this is.
For the fight scenes, the awful lighting, and bad angles are even worse, making it nearly impossible to follow; the little bit you can see is just gratuitous for the sake of 'edginess'.
Which brings me to my last point: this is a show designed for teenage-edge-lords. The first scene with Hawk in it, and the threatened castration are just so over the top, its ridiculous -they want to torture him for information, so their immediate, go-to response is castration? And the 'villain'... "this will be the most painful thing you've ever felt, and the last pain you'll ever feel"? It was seriously so 'edgy' I was expecting Reaper from Overwatch to show up.
Now, for the part that will really get panties in a twist... The comic differences. Okay, I get it: it's an interpretation of the comics, and that's fine. I'm down with different perspectives, and changes. But they've gotta have a purpose, or at least tie in to the story -you can't just change them and expect people to run with it.
Take Starfire for instance; she's always been relatively happy-go-lucky girl, who goes full-on Desctructoid when you make her angry. While she was definitely attractive, and very sensual in the comics, she was never seductive, or a full on sociopath who just burned for the sake of burning.
Similarly, while Dick Grayson was known for his maudlin moments, and the fact that he, out of all the Robins, left because he didn't want to become Bruce, he's so out of character in this, it's ridiculous, and honestly, an insult to fans. They literally tried mushing the three older Robins into one person under the Dick Grayson name. Caring demeanor, wanting to help everyone he could? Dick Grayson check. Edginess, violent, and willing to permanently maim, disfigure, and potentially kill? Jason Todd check. Wiz with computers, fights with a bo staff? Tim Drake check. Because the way to truly make your fans love something is to take three very different characters, and mush them all together into one character who has bits of them all, but isn't actually any of them.
Raven, who was always the confident, somewhat aloof girl, struggling to keep her true nature under control has turned into a scared, whining, heavily-religious child who's literally afraid of her own reflection, and bounces around from 'typical teenager' who ignores Dick when he tries talking to her while she's watching a show, to angsty, moody girl who either cries, or hides away, to busybody who sticks her nose in, and feels the need to throw her two cents into everything.
TL;DR: Bad acting, bad dialogue, bad film work, bad characterizations abound; no hope in sight. Fans looking for a good DC show will have to keep waiting.
The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor (2008)
Wow. And not in a good way...
Alright, so firstly, I do have to be completely honest and say that I haven't even finished this movie yet. I actually paused it, so I could write this review, something I've never done before. But this was so terrible I had to vent it all out.
What the heck is this?! It definitely isn't The Mummy. Firstly, whatever reasons Rachel Weisz had for not appearing in this, I'd be willing to guarantee that the largest one was the terrible script. Even with a well done script (which this movie definitely didn't have), throwing a new actress in would have caused waves. But at least having the new actress took some of the heat off of the god-awful script.
Which leads to problem number one.
I've never heard of the actress they got to play Evelyn. But she should have -and based of this movie, probably will -remain in obscurity. Whatever they paid Ms. Bello was far too much. Even her accent was terrible.
Now I do understand, filling Weisz's shoes would be difficult for anyone, and I tried to give Bello the benefit of the doubt. But after ten minutes of her, I was almost ready to chuck the remote through the TV just to get her off of it. Her acting skills were atrocious. I don't know if she was trying to play Evelyn as Weisz would have done, and failing miserably, or if she was really just that terrible of an actress. Honestly, without Weisz, this movie shouldn't have been made. Not because Weisz 'made' the movie, but because we'd had two movies to come to know and love the O'Connell family, and the random insertion of a completely different looking actress to play Evy was probably the worst choice they could have made.
Problem number two was Luke Ford. His horrible acting skills aside, the first thing that made me mentally cringe was his accent. He went from (in the Mummy Returns) having an obviously very British accent, and yet in this movie, all of the sudden he's an American (or apparently Canadian, but I digress). Again, you don't just change something like that. Maybe a good actor could have pulled it off. But a good actor, this kid was not. His lines were stiff, and unbelievable at the best of times, and seemed like he was reading directly from the script during his first read through the rest of the time.
And my last, and final problem (or at least the final one at only 30 minutes in) was how completely out of character everyone had gotten. Now I haven't seen too much of Jonathon, but Evy and Rick are like two completely different people. Not just in their actions, but even their own words. The characters not only did a complete 180 from the first and second film, but the way they talk doesn't even align with the previous movies. They talk about Evelyn coddling Alex, and Rick ignoring him, which apparently they started doing sometime after the Mummy Returns for some odd reason.
Now, I will continue to finish watching the movie. Maybe they'll come up with some magical way to change my opinion, and I'll have to come back and change all this. But somehow I highly doubt it's possible at this point.
Sherlock Holmes (2009)
Eh
Firstly: This movie was so far off base of the original Sherlock Holmes stories, it was ridiculous. Irene Adler being an ex-lover, and the absent heroin/cocaine addiction being the biggest things changed.
But even with that, it was a watchable movie. I can't quite explain why; I would typically say, that if it wasn't based off a book, it would have been quite a good movie. But that doesn't quite work here. I wouldn't watch it again, but I don't consider it a total waste of my time.
So I guess watch it to make up your own mind. It's quite a decent movie, just incredibly different from the books, in serious and large ways.
*spoilers* I hate it when they take a classic, and turn it into a PC romance, which is just what they did. Anyone who has read the original stories will know Holmes would never have been in the company of Irene Adler except to arrest her. And his cocaine addiction -while not a focal point- is something that comes up frequently in the stories, as something he does to keep his mind sharp in between cases. Also, Holmes would NEVER have considered using 'mystical' powers or whatnot. He was hard-core empirical, and would have continued searching for a logical, scientific explanation till he died, rather than mess with something he didn't believe in, and -on more than one occasion- was disdainful of.
Teenage Dirtbag (2009)
Exceptional movie
At first, I wasn't sure I'd like this movie when I sat down to watch it on Netflix. I don't typically watch teenage drama movies, but I was pleasantly surprised by this.
Firstly, it's not a teenage drama. I mean, it is, but it's more than that at the same time. To watch Thayer and Amber's relationship slowly turn from antagonistic to friends, to possible romance is a wonderful journey, that was very exceptionally done.
Secondly, I know this movie is a cliché that's been done thousands of times. Bad boy from the wrong side of the tracks falls for the high and mighty cheerleader? Breakfast Club, anyone? But this movie was unique in one aspect:
It stayed true to life. In reality, Amber WOULDN'T have given up her friends, her way of life to be with Thayer. Very few people have the courage to step outside of the little boxed worlds they live in comfortably, to the unknown, and often times scary world outside of our box.
Some scenes were a little... Well, I guess bordering on disturbing. The abuse scenes we see are very tactfully done, and we never really see too much, although we know what's going on.
The actors were amazing for this. Scott Michael Foster did an EXCELLENT job as Thayer. For the first few minutes of the movie, I kept waiting for the 'Bad Boy' to show up, before I realized that the boy I was seeing WAS Thayer. He didn't have tattoos, or piercings, or dress in ripped shirts, black pants, etc. Unlike most actors, he used his acting to portray who he was acting, not his clothes or appearance.
Noa Hegesh wasn't quite as good as Scott Michael Foster, but still did an incredible job of portraying the cheerleader who's unhappy with her life, but unwilling to change.
One last note: The two leads never kissed on screen. Thinking back, I don't think they ever had any real physical contact. But you could still feel the emotions jumping off the screen at you.
Very well done movie, one of the best Indie films I've ever seen, if not the best.
Mysterious Skin (2004)
Tough-to-watch movie
Personally, I thought this movie was excellent. Instead of the Hollywood fairy tale where everyone ends up happy in the end, and realizes their mistakes, become stronger people, and just forget about what happened to them, this movie shows you the truth:
There is no 'moving' on. There's only different ways of handling it.
That being said, I've seen multiple reviews that say this movie is 'glorifying' pedophilia. To which I respond... Did you really even watch this movie?
Yes, Neil goes through most of the movie acting like he enjoyed the abuse he went through. Firstly, it's a typical survivor's mechanism, similar to Stockholm Syndrome. To survive, you convince yourself that you like it, so the mental anguish doesn't rip you apart. And also, you have to remember that the coach was the first male in his life who showed him any attention whatsoever, good, bad or indifferent. Lastly, anybody who seen the end knew that Neil did feel bad about what he had done.
There is nothing about Neil's reaction that hasn't been seen before in victims of sexual abuse (both boys and girls). So in essence, these people saying that Neil is horrible person for saying he 'enjoyed' it... You're saying that the thousands of rape victims out there, who did what they had to to survive are 'horrible'.
This movie shows both ends of the broad spectrum of reactions children typically have to being abused. Brian, who completely blocked it out, dissociating himself from it, going through life asexual because he was subconsciously terrified of sex after the abuse he'd gone through. Neil, who convinced himself that his coach loved him, and that he had to do anything the man asked to keep that love, turned to hustling as a way to try and fill the void in his life.
I've noticed the tags, and the reviews that call this a homosexual movie. Really, it's not. Neil happens to be a homosexual hustler (typical of male survivors of sexual abuse), so we see that, but it's not ABOUT that. It's about two boys, who went through a horrifying ordeal one summer as children, trying to find their way in the world.
It takes an open-minded individual to watch this movie, I will say that much. It's graphic, and brutal in its depictions of violence. But if you can bear through that to reach the end, it's worth it.
The only issue I had was with the girl who played Wendy. Her lines were woodenly delivered, and tried to take on an air of sophistication that she couldn't pull off. The boy who played Eric did slightly better, but still not all that great.
Jet Boy (2001)
Something about this movie
There's just something about this movie that pulls you in. Overall, it's got unbelievable parts (Boon and his girlfriend picking up their relationship in one day, after not seeing each other for twenty years, Boon being able to sign Nathan out of jail, etc), and the boy who plays Nathan isn't that great of an actor... But despite all that, there's something about this movie that just... I don't know, pulls you in, and makes you want to cry for Nathan. The scene in the field with the other boy, where Nathan describes the abuse at the hands of his mother and her boyfriends, you can tell he's trying to be strong, trying not to cry... and it made me want to cry, and I'm not one who cries easily. The scene in the motel with Boon is another heart breaker, as you watch this boy - who has been so screwed up that he feels sex is the only way he can be loved- struggle to keep himself from crying as he offers himself to the man he wants to be his father... This was a wonderful script, and even with Nathan's mediocre acting, it still shines through as an amazing movie.
Twist (2003)
Overall, a great movie
Firstly, forget about this being a remake of Oliver Twist. This movie deserves to stand on its own. Matter of fact, this movie would have been better without Oliver. Told from the view point of Dodge, this movie was heart-breaking. Definitely not a happy movie; nowhere in this movie is there anything that will make a person laugh, or even crack a smile. It's a depressingly true to life look at the lives of hustlers, right down to the ending. That being said, this movie would have been perfect... If Oliver wasn't in it. As far as I'm concerned, he took away from the movie. The only thing of value he added was to show that Dodge was trying to help him. Other than that, he distracted from the rest of the movie. Again, don't watch if you're looking for a happy movie, or even a sad movie with a happy ending. But if you're looking for a true to life movie, this is it.
Bones (2005)
Pretty good
The main reason I decided to write this is so people know what it's really about. I can tolerate the people who dislike it because they think the actors are bad, or the show is predictable, and clichéd, etc. But for all these people going on about it being a conservative show? What world are you people living in? Yes, Seeley Booth comes across as a conservative; mainly because the man has values, and morals, such as 'be monogamous' 'stand up for what's right', and he believes whole-heartedly in Christianity and the church. Now personally, anyone who can't identify, or at least understand those values.. probably not someone worth listening to anyways. Brennan isn't liberal or conservative theoretically. If anything I would say she leans more towards liberal with her very loose moral system. She's just very un-PC, which in this era, is a god-send, and a delight to watch. But what I've come to notice is in the day to day small things with the show, it leans more towards being very liberal. Pre-marital sex, random hook ups, feminism galore, and the obvious derision of Booth's Christianity are just a few things that tilt it in that direction. But in the big things, yes it does tend to lean more towards conservative. And frankly, seeing as how we have probably over a million liberal/left- wing shows on the television... I think liberals would be more tolerant of one that sits on the fence. Now, all that being said, I enjoy the show. Brennan's straight forward honesty, non-political correctness, Booth's intense loyalty to his values... Yeah, the plot is pretty much just like every other crime show on TV. But I think Brennan and Booth make all the difference, just with their honesty, and stead-fastedness.
Joe the King (1999)
This movie perpetuates a large part of what's wrong in America
This movie was, firstly, nothing like what all the summaries, plots, etc. The mother wasn't abusive at all; maybe a bit neglectful, but I would call even that a stretch. In fact, the only 'abuse' is once when the father swats him, and we hear about the second time, when the brother tells Joe that his father punched their mother. Neglect, yeah, there's a lot of that. Were they crappy parents? Yeah, definitely. But to make it out like this kid 'suffers horrible abuse' is just insultingly ridiculous. Secondly, there was not a single character in this whole film who I really cared about at all. The parents were stupid, dense, and thick, the brother was willing to turn his back on Joe at any time, the teacher (played by a very disappointing Ethan Hawke) was -at least this was my impression, I'm sure people will disagree -a retarded moron, who didn't really care about Joe at all, the people at his job who alternate between nice and 'evil horrible monsters' so quickly it's not believable, and Joe's friends who end up betraying him, or turning their back on him. Again, most of this firm is unbelievable. Almost all of the characters go from evil demons to loving saints at some point, mostly in the blink of an eye. I also believe that the so called 'abuse' in this story helps perpetuate a large part of what is wrong with America today. There are real kids out there, who live in constant hell, not knowing whether or not today will be the day a family member takes the abuse too far and kills them. But I have continually seen films like this, and often times in real life, where a kid mouths off, his parent swats him, and it's 'OH MY GOD, THEY BEAT THE POOR CHILD!'. No. Joe had it pretty damn light compared to a lot of kids. All that aside... There still was not a single redeeming quality. Not even Joe himself. The boy brought on ninety percent of his own problems by being retarded. Horrible, horrible movie, with nothing going for it.
Runaway (2005)
Amazing Movie
Wow. Being a fan of Aaron Stanford, I'd spent almost two years looking for this movie before it came out on Netflix. Firstly, let me say the only reason I didn't give this movie a ten out of ten was the ages of the boys. I think Aaron Stanford could have pulled off seventeen or eighteen (since he did it in the X-men movies), rather than have him at twenty-one. That was a little unbelievable. Being a pedophile, his father would have moved on long before he turned twenty-one. But other than that, this movie grabs you from the start. The abuse scenes are done in a very tactful manner, unlike some movies I've seen where they try to make a porno out of molestation or rape. We see just enough to let us know what's going on, and that's it. And the ending was amazing. I pride myself on being able to correctly guess the ending of a movie nine times out of ten. This ending was nowhere close to what I expected. Over all, it's not a tear-jerker per say. And it's not a happy movie. There's no 'happy ending'. It's a serious, sad look at the life of a young man whose life has been ruined by years of abuse. Other than the age thing, it's a gritty, realistic movie that just tugs at your heart. The acting was amazing. Again, I was an Aaron Stanford fan for a while before this, but after watching this... Just wow. He pulled it with flying colors. Zach Savage and Peter Gerety were also pretty good. Robin Tunney wasn't bad, just... some of her lines seemed too rushed. Most of it was very good, but a few lines (the one where she reveals her scars being an example) she just seemed to plough through them. But still... If you like realistic looks into the aftermath of abuse, this is an excellent film.
Eragon (2006)
Horrible, especially if you've read the book.
When I first read these books (Eragon, then Eldest), I instantly fell in love with them. They were incredibly well written, with a good plot line, and... well, almost everything about the books were excellent. So I was EXTREMELY excited to go out and watch the movie... And I got the disappointment of a life time. Firstly, this movie should have been longer. I don't care about 'the time limits placed' or whatever. Certain things in the movie should have been played out, as they are in the book. Things that are important to the plot were just hurried along, or completely left out. Secondly, while I loved the actors they got to play the characters, and thought they were perfect for the part, I was quite disappointed that they left out several key elements to the book. Over all, this movie was a huge disappointment, and a discredit to Christopher Paolini's writing. The writers for this movie tore apart a good book, and gave it a crappy plot, bad dialog, and a rushed feeling to the whole thing. Very disappointing. I seriously hope that they don't do a sequel, and ruin Eldest for me as well. So to any fans of the books, a quick word of advice: STAY FAR AWAY FROM THE MOVIE!!