Change Your Image
mark-d-jordan1
Lists
An error has ocurred. Please try againReviews
Third Person (2013)
Way Deeper Than You think
Like a poem which can be read over and over and have new meanings each time, this film can be interpreted depending on the viewer, which makes it more interesting than your run-of-the-mill film.
Basically, Liam Neeson's character Michael is trying to write another successful novel but is tormented by the drowning death of his young son. He is having marital difficulties with his wife Elaine (Kim Basinger) due to the death of his son and his affair with Anna (Olivia Wilde). The only real main characters in the story are Michael, Elaine and Anna. The other main characters are not real. Keep all this in mind.
Michael, near the end, is revealed as the cause of his son's drowning because he took a phone call from his mistress Anna and was not watching his son in the pool. His guilt from this is overwhelming and so he creates in his mind, as he writes a novel, two separate stories to help relieve the guilt. He has gone to Paris (or Rome if you make it to the end) to write and be alone to think. One story (his) is real but two are not. The two imaginary stories involve the characters inability to be with their child although the child is still alive in both (one is questionable as they never show the actual child, or do they?). So Michael is making up stories as to why a parent cant get to their child just as he can no longer do.
In a sense Michael is making up alternate realities for why his child is missing from his life or trying to justify a scenario where the child is missing but found alive. What the stories are you will have to watch to find out. But why the stories exist is more important. There is one story in Rome between Scott (Adrien Brody) and Monika (Moran Atias). There is another in NYC with Julia (Mila Kunis) and Rick (James Franco) and there is the main story in Paris with Michael (Liam Neeson), Anna (Olivia Wilde) and Elaine (Kim Basinger), who is not in Paris but part of the Paris story.
The three stories are woven in an interconnected way. A character from each of the stories connects to a character in the other stories. The one confusing part was when they kept showing Julia (Mila Kunis) cleaning hotel rooms in what appeared to be the Paris hotel of Liam Neeson yet Julia (Mila Kunis) was clearly living in NYC and dealing with ex-husband Rick (James Franco) in a child custody case. Even the cities were getting mixed in the head of Michael (Liam Neeson) the writer.
I am not sure if the three stories appear in the book that Michael (Liam Neeson) finishes at the end of the movie. One reviewer suggested that they were all characters that were erased from the finished novel but I am not so sure as they may have been the book itself. In the movie the characters disappear near the end but to me that may mean the saga has simply ended for those characters. It is open to interpretation. You will notice at the end that Michael's wife has the completed novel (in draft form). It appears that the completed novel was what Michael needed to get over his son's death. There is a twist. Michael's mistress Anna (Olivia Wilde) is revealed to be sleeping with her dad earlier in the film,and Michael has put this in his finished novel. He seems willing to destroy his affair with her in order to end his guilt of her being the one who called him and distracted him while his son died. Everything in the film is meant to help Michael get over his guilt. There is a connecting phrase "watch me" which appears in the film and you will need to listen for.
This is probably a way more brilliant film than the average reviewer has indicated. The acting is really good and it keeps your interest as you try to figure it out. It was complex to write I am sure and an experiment in boldness and modern film making.
Margaret (2011)
A pitiful script and some just as bad performances
This could be one of the five worst movies I have seen in the last 10 years. I could have directed a film better than this and I am not in that industry. Here me out. I have watched movies intently for 40+ years. I rarely watch sitcoms, reality TV, nature shows, talk shows, drama series, or even made for TV movies. I just about only watch theatrical movies. This movie is so poorly directed that I was angry I wasted my time. Anna Paquin must have delivered one of the worst performances of a leading lady ever. This woman simply can not act. Even my wife who is not an avid movie fan commented, "Who is this terrible actress?" How someone like this ever made it into the movies is a complete mystery. Please do not waste your life watching this. It is hard to believe that Matthew Broderick, Mark Ruffalo, Matt Damon and Jean Reno were in this. Did they read the script beforehand? I am very fair when I rate a movie and rarely have I seen a movie this poorly scripted. The dialog was horrid! I watched this thing, following scene after scene, expecting some great revelation and then nothing happened. At times there were bizarre sequences of filming which were totally out of place and proceeded no where. My wife and I actually cracked up at this. Did this film have an editor? I will admit there was perhaps 10 minutes of good dialog in the film. It is not like I am an old person who is everything but liberal or not in touch with modernity. I am a part-time abstract artist and very progressive in other ways as well. I have an open mind about everything but know a bad film when I see it. Kenneth Lonergan is not a director to watch in the future. Cross him off the list.
Hatfields & McCoys: White Lightning (2013)
Your average reality show with an interesting subject
I would be surprised if this becomes a hit. There are simply too many reality shows on now. As we all know the characters on these shows are real but can never be trusted to be doing actual real stuff that really happened. This show is in line with that. Its obvious some of the situations have been coerced or re-enacted. It gets a little silly at times in its logic. But so far I have enjoyed the first three episodes of it. Even if much of it is faked, it is an interesting depiction of characters! Part of the charm is the area it takes place in, the border of West Virginia and Kentucky. This is a beautiful part of the country. That alone keeps my interest. I find the people in this area to be very interesting as well. I don't really live that far from there.
One thing that I was thrown by was this. The McCoys and Hatfields depicted here seem to already have plenty of money. Or at least they have a lot of nice assets and estates! They seem to be more well off than me anyway, and I'm a city slicker who thought I was going to see a bunch of hillbillies. I think these people are more well off and some more educated then the average American. That was somehow disappointing.
Let me add, that it some way Courtney McCoy is hot! I find it humorous the clothes they put her in though. Or maybe she picks them herself. She is the babe element of the show.
All in all it is an average realty show and nothing special. I am familiar with and enjoy moonshine so that also caught my interest. I did enjoy the historical part of the show, if it is actually true. One never knows about these modern reality shows. You cant trust anyone, let alone a Hatfield or McCoy!
Warrior (2011)
How Could this Movie get a High Rating on IMDb
"Warrior" was pretty good, not badly filmed and not badly acted. But that is it. That also describes many films that got less then 7.0 ratings at IMDb. I'm not sure why in the heck people are rating this as high as it is. Either a bunch of studio people got on here and posted ratings or a bunch of numb skulls who simply rate any fighting movie high did. Don't simply rate a movie high because you like the subject. Thats not really the point of the rating system. As others suggested this movie never did develop the three main characters much. There did not appear to be a deep enough reason for all the animosity that took place between the characters. Most of the movie was taken up by fight scenes. The creators of this movie needed to watch "Rocky" better as it had the formula correct for this type of movie. It was also kind of stupid that Tommy was still fighting with one arm in the end. The film was a little degraded due to that. Lets have votes from people who know all kinds of movies and not just action films.
Hævnen (2010)
A Shocking Film Masterpiece
On occasion a movie comes along that is simply incredible. This is one of those films. I give it a 10 and I have not given many films that rating despite having used IMDb since practically its inception. But one must rate films based on all other films they have seen. No film will ever theoretically be a perfect 10, but this film is a masterpiece compared to other films I have seen. You may not like the subject and it is disturbing in some respect, but look at it as a work of art. I forgot I was even watching a movie. The filming and acting are superb. The directing top notch. I am not sure how "In a Better World" ended up with an overall rating of 7.7 when it surely is as good as any American film I have ever seen (I am American). There must have been a bunch of young people who simply did not get it. It is a cerebral film that requires maturity, but it moves along at a pace that is not boring in the least. I was on the edge of my seat and thought about it long after I saw it.
Senna (2010)
Great Documentary Film Making But Little Else
This is a well done documentary even if you are just a student of film and not an F1 fan. I am an F1 fan and so was excited to see all the old race footage. The editing was well done and I am amazed they had all that old footage almost as if this was a film waiting to eventually be. Senna seemed obviously a fanatic of racing and this is the first impression you get. He basically had no other desires in life if you take what was portrayed in this documentary. He apparently had a great desire to help children as well with his riches, which is always a good thing. But I got the impression the film makers were trying to impress us more than we could be impressed with the "man" Senna. I personally got the feeling he was a spoiled rich kid who insisted stubbornly on his way and not some kind bighearted individual who was in any way humble. We often epitomize these sports figures as great people. They are good athletes for sure but I think we can see from this film that is all they really are in most cases. Watch this documentary to see good documentary film making, but see if you don't feel that Senna was not as impressive of a human as he was a driver.
The Expendables (2010)
Are they serious?
I watch a lot of movies. In fact it's nearly all I watch on TV or On Demand. This movie has got to be one of the worst movies I have ever seen and it's not even a good action movie. Yes there is a lot of action and violence, which I like normally, but it is poorly filmed around even worse dialog. I watched it based on the initial reviews from people on IMDb being good. What movie did these people see or were the reviewers all teenagers? Look, if you are going to make a movie you have to make an effort to make the dialog and acting the best that you can. Neither was present in this film, and now I see there is a part 2. Come on, get real! I also agree with another commenter that action scenes need to be filmed at a distance that we can see them. If it is too close I get more irritated than any sense that I am in the fight. This movie was poorly filmed with completely stupid fighting outcomes. Obviously it was an attempt to make money, as it did, and not an attempt to film a good film! Don't waste your time.
Kings (2009)
I was mad it was cancelled
I was very disappointed this series was cancelled. As one reviewer said this series may have worked better on HBO or Starz. Personally I feel it was overly intellectual for the average person so people just thought it was not interesting, when in reality it was very well done. The acting was very good and I found every episode to be intriguing and mind bending. The production, style and techniques used were superb. But most viewers do not like to think this much and so it failed. It was easily one of the top 20 series, in my opinion, I have seen on TV in my 45 years of viewing. It is a shame that every time I find a gem like this it only lasts one or two years, and I am a viewer of everything from Rich Man Poor Man, Twin Peaks, Family Guy, I Love Raymond to The Walking Dead.
Game of Thrones (2011)
OK, But Not Excellent
I give this show some accolades so far for sticking to the books pretty well. The acting was actually very good as well as the costumes. I can't say I was a huge fan of the settings. Something was missing that I could not put my finger on. Maybe too much CGI? I'd prefer real sets in this story I think, where possible. I'm getting a little tired of the same type modern computer graphics look in all these different series on the various networks. The other problem was the speed they attempted to introduce the characters. Seems like I couldn't quite get an endearment for any of them yet. I guess they were just trying to get people hooked from the beginning and introduce the whole map area and various families. I'm not sure that worked well in practice. I'll watch the whole thing with the hope that it works out well, but I am not real overly impressed with the beginning. Not bad, just not excellent.
Spartacus: Blood and Sand (2010)
Addictive series but not perfect
I like this series a lot and have not been able to stop watching it. I admit it is addictive and I am 50 years young. I do not subscribe to Starz but have been watching it on Netflix. As some others have said here, do not expect a "Rome" type series which was on HBO. I saw that as well and liked it better than any mini-series I have seen. Spartacus is meant to be a modernized violent lusty cartoon style version of the story and is filmed in that modern slow-mo style. I would think many more males will like it than females. Very little is known about Spartacus so do not expect historical accuracy much. I do have some negative comments. They really did not need the vulgar language as much. I highly doubt the use of it draws viewers nor were the Romans known to use it that much (I've studied Roman history most of my life). Some script lines almost seemed sillier with the vulgar words in than when I repeated them in my own head without them. Definite over use there. The amount of nudity was not really needed although there were some hot women on there and I didn't mind. But it was not all needed to keep either viewers or the intensity of the story. A little less would have worked fine. At some points it actually got old. My final negative comment concerns some of the fight scenes. They were fine except very inconsistent! Spartacus would be thrown a little and seemingly not be able to get up for minutes yet when hit full force in a slow motion shot with a weapon to the face, he continued to fight and not even fall down. This was getting more irritating than anything in the series. It is fine to stylize fights and make them larger than life, but keep some consistency that at least resembles real life.
Before the Devil Knows You're Dead (2007)
An excellent film not to be missed
This is a masterful film that should be in any ones library if you consider yourself a collector of best films. It's incredible that the script was this well written by a, basically, beginner. The directing was just about perfect and easily concludes Lumet as one of the top 10 directors of all time, if you also consider his other work. The acting was really good and the only weakness may have been Finney, who walked around with his mouth open a little too much. I assume he must do that in real life also. It wasn't his best roll, but not bad. I'm trying to think of other negative things to say about the film but honestly can't think of any. I think this should have at least been nominated for a Best Director Oscar or Golden Globe. Another positive to some of us men was the well shown nudity of Tomei. There is no doubt something about her that goes beyond words. Her acting was dead on as usual too. I don't recall ever seeing her do a bad acting job. In all, you should see this film if you want to see one of the best films around.
The Walking Dead (2010)
Interesting at first but then...
I watched all the episodes for the supposed first season. What is wrong with TV? A season has just 6 episodes? What crap. Remember when a season had at least 11 new episodes?
Anyway it started out good and kept bringing me back. After a few episodes it actually got boring, corny and stupid at times. Shane listens for the sheriff's heart beat by putting his ear against the sheriff's chest, never checking his pulse the correct way. This is just plain stupid to show this. At the end it appeared the writers were actually running out of ideas and trying to throw in drama between characters that just wasn't good human drama. How are they going to make it through another season?
Some people have mentioned that the zombies were not scary. This is unimportant really. I don't think I would be scared of zombies either since they do move so slowly. In reality they probably would not be as gruesome as most of the zombies on this show but would look like pale skinny people with messed up hair.
I am just not sure if trying to mix a human soap opera type drama with a futuristic zombie event is going to work that well for more than a few seasons. It will eventually just be the same thing over and over.
Inception (2010)
A good movie but not as great as indicated by the reviews here
OK, this is surely not the third greatest movie ever as the statistics on here indicate so far. I'm an avid movie buff who watches every detail of a movie like a rabbit in heat watches female rabbits. It is a good movie and I will be thinking about it for a while, but not as long as I thought about Memento. Christopher Nolen is a genius of some kind I admit. Anyone who can write like he does certainly is. I do some writing myself and I am envious. I can't point out any specific flaws in the movie other than the obvious, "some of the concepts just would not work in reality." The acting was good and the story was intriguing as can be. CGI I could care less about, as it does not make a great movie. I am leery of the voters on here as there seems to be no real reason they are voting for what they vote on (come on, The Shawshank Redemtion is picked as the best movie of all time, that's laughable). I do recommend seeing this movie, but if you are a movie buff for real I also recommend going back in time and seeing some well rated older moves from directors such as Scorsese, Bergman, Coppola, Spielberg and Aronofsky. You will definitely see this is not the 3rd best movie of all time. There is too much emphasis put on votes from a younger crowd who simply like weird stuff as opposed to intelligent all around film making combined with excellent acting.
Roger Dodger (2002)
A Brilliant Film
That was the Jennifer Beals from Flash Dance? She is still really good-looking and sexy! As for the film, it was very good. I found myself smiling in many situations, as I recognized the realism in much of the dialog.
I Could not believe how much of it was exactly what I had thought back in the 80's when I was "clubbing"! Very realistic moments, whether you like it or not! Many of the lines were just the way it is with most men and the way it was with us back then. It was a very enjoyable movie for its realism. I applaud the writer. I can't say Campbell Scott was the best actor. His part could have been slightly better portrayed. But the script itself was done very well.
The Departed (2006)
A good movie, but not as good as expected
The Departed was definitely an action packed, edge-of-your-seat, exciting film to watch. It was good-to excellent and highly recommended. I usually watch most films at home on a small TV (by today's standards). So I get a more critical perspective of the actual quality of directing or acting, without the overwhelming assault on sensations that occurs in a theater. Many films seem great in a theater but then only average on a home TV! The Departed was well directed and acted, but I've seen better acting and direction in other films, many times. Matt Damon did not do the best job he could have. Mark Wahlberg's character seemed a little un-realistic. Some of the film did as well. It was not Martin Scorsese's best directing effort, so do not expect that. There seemed to be too much effort to make it "stylized", quick and modern, to appeal to younger audiences. I hate that trend. Mr. Scorsese is one of the best directors of all time without a doubt. He should or could have won "Best Directing" for several other films in the past, including Goodfellas, The Last Temptation of Christ, Raging Bull, Taxi Driver, The Color of Money or After Hours. All were better directed in my opinion. I am very sure the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences only really gave him an Oscar for The Departed because it was getting to the point of being ridiculous that he had not won in the past, for better films.