Change Your Image
![](https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BMjQ4MTY5NzU2M15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwNDc5NTgwMTI@._V1_SY100_SX100_.jpg)
calinn_g
Reviews
World War Z (2013)
Can't we just move on already?
Zombies. Another film about zombies. They are dead men walking who are out to get us. And eat us. You can't reason with them, you can't cure them, apparently you have to shoot them multiple times in the head in some movies in order to kill them, cause being dead, but not really dead has its advantages sometimes. They are slow and drool all over the place in some films, fast as cheetahs in others, rather smart in some films, stupid as rocks in others. Bla bla bla, we all know about them. They came, they were interesting for some people for a while, many films were made about them...
NOW CAN'T WE JUST MOVE ON? I really don't see what's the fascination about this idea of the "zombie". They're even more boring than vampires, which are quite ridiculous too. I mean, can you make a romantic movie about zombies? Now, cause they can't feel squat. Can you make a psychological thriller about a zombie? Now, cause they can't feel squat. Can you make a comedy about them? Well, actually you can, if you're pretending you're making a serious movie. So it's a limited subject which pretty much goes about the same way every time: they are out to get us, but they are dumb, we are smart. We manage to figure out something and they get squashed in the end. Every time it goes down like this. How many freaking movies must be still made about them then? We got the picture, Hollywood. MOVE ON!
Ancient Aliens (2009)
What if, perhaps, maybe, could it be that...
...that's what you usually hear in this show. Speculation, suggestions, hypothetical thinking. All based on the idea that "the primitive men with their primitive tools COULDN'T have done this, couldn't have done that", therefore aliens did it. But we are never presented with a tool or fragment of tool that is far more advanced than what the ancient people could have invented (which is pretty strange, since these aliens supposedly built EVERY single monumental construction in the ancient world, in all these sites we never found anything that looked alien-ish).
And then there's the lies. The amount of lies in this show is absolutely and disgustingly huge. When i see Erik von Daniken and George Tsoukalos on the screen saying that the complex of Pumapunku was made out of granite (when in fact it's made out of less harder material like red sandstone and andesite) or that you need diamonds in order to be able to cut through granite (when in fact granite has been proved to be fairly easy to cut with the use of sand and tools made of materials as soft as copper), then i can't help myself to not get red with anger and frustration that people suck in everything these lying cheats are feeding them.
If you want not to be a sucker, please question and try to verify everything that's said in this show, cause there's a big chances that whatever it may be you're verifying, it will turn out to be a lie.
Riley Rewind (2013)
Wish i could rewind the time lost...
I'm a long time subscriber of RWJ on Youtube, but somehow i don't feel like having a moral obligation just for this reason to give this film a high vote by default. However, given the ratings so far, it seems that i'm one of the few who thinks this way. It's a well known fact that fans tend to over-value the works of their idols, but i would expect at least some degree of objectivity and fairness. There seems to be little of that among those who voted and reviewed so far, cause i can't explain myself for what other reason this series would get reviews naming it: "innovative", "entertaining", "well written" etc. and an average rating of 8.5 at the moment. I was particularly disgusted by one review that gave it (obviously) 10 stars and that judged everything about this ... thing as BRILLIANT. That was disgusting, to be that dishonest with yourself and the others: that's cheating life.
There is one excuse i've seen used for the failure of this movie more than any: the budget. To that, i will say: they made The Blair Witch Project and Clerks with less money.
There's also an appeal some people make, saying critics should give it a break, because it is inspired by Anna Akana's family tragedy, she lost her sister, apparently to suicide. To that, i will say: making an appeal to pity is not a fair thing to do. I feel for anybody who lost someone dear, but that won't make me lie to myself and to them. Judge the creation, not the creator. Many will say i'm a cold-hearted bastard maybe, but to be honest, when i watch a movie, i don't really care if those involved in its creation suffered some kind of loss in the past. I don't care about that, that doesn't make the actual film better than it is. So please, no more "give the movie a break, she lost her sister" non-sense.
Overall, this is a flop. I hope they will learn something from it and produce an internet masterpiece next time (or who knows, maybe a real movie) and shut us critics up. I would like to see how a comedy made by Ray would look like, since that's his main field of activity on Youtube. I would like that to happen, cause i'm sure it would be successful.
Inglourious Basterds (2009)
If you disregard history... then it's historically accurate
Pretty typical QT stuff, lots of action, lots of shooting, bloody scenes, snuff deaths. In fact, i would say it's too QT typical actually.
I enjoyed most of Tarantino's hits so far, i love overreacted action combined with smart-ish dialogues and situations at times, i'm just that kind of a guy. The man's created a niche for himself and he made it almost an industry, you got to give him that - when you see a Tarantino movie, you know it's a Tarantino movie, even without the credits. But i wouldn't go as far as calling him the most brilliant director of our times or even a legend of directing, as his more hardcore fans are always tempted to do (and do it most of the times). He's good, no doubt about it.
However, i'm of the opinion that a great director is one that does not repeat himself over and over again (even if he repeats himself pretty good). It gets boring, knowing what to expect (in general lines of course) before each film and more so, to be right in your expectations every time. QT, although producing what taken separately can definitely be called great movies, didn't evolve. He didn't adapt. He didn't change. He didn't experiment. He didn't improve.
That's why even before watching this movie i had that feeling that i would not be very excited with it anyway and i was right. I didn't like it much because as i said, i've seen it before so many times. And i didn't like it because when i watch a movie involving historical characters and situations, i expect it to be accurate too. I accept that the particularities of that moment in history may be a fruit of fantasy, i accept invented episodes of real history figures, but i expect that at the end of it all, the film as a whole will respect history. Inglorious Basterds obviously doesn't. Hitler and the creme of the third Reich didn't die in a plot in a parisian cinema, nor did the war end with their deaths. That's rubbish, why couldn't QT just invent some "very important members of the German Reich" and make them die in Paris in a burning theater? That would've been forgivable, more than forgivable, it would have been plausible and combined with the overall high entertainment factor of the movie, it would have made a pretty damn good blockbuster.
So, without any further comments, i'll give it a 5/10 and say that if i didn't accept the surplus of fantasy in "Abraham Lincoln vampire hunter", there's no way i can accept in this movie just for the sake of Quentin Tarantino.
Nuntã în Basarabia (2009)
More like Confusion in Basarabia
First of all, i must say i'm romanian and live very close to the border with Basarabia (Republic of Moldova), in the north east of Romania. I feel the need to mention that, to be sure that people won't omit that i'm romanian and accuse me of being harsh with the movie just because i don't understand the culture. I do, i've lived in it for most of my life.
Now the movie: there's more confusion in this film than i've seen in any film before. We have all kinds of confused, undefined characters, mixed characters, characters with doubtful allegiance and confused views on basically anything discussed in the movie. They're all a bit on this side, a bit on the other, no one has a firm and decided view on anything.
The movie is basically about a young couple (he's romanian, she's moldavian) that were officially married in Romania and go to Moldova's capital city, Chisinau, to celebrate the wedding with her family's relatives. They are accompanied by the grooms mom and his uncle (probably the only family he's got, cause normally if he had more relatives, they would be at the party too). They are traveling by train and the first scenes are shot during the journey. The initial mood is very relaxed, suggesting the viewer they're watching a comedy. But they are and they are not at the same time. They arrive in Chisinau and as they knock at her parents' apartment door, you would expect to see happy faces behind it. Instead they are received by sad, unenthusiastic figures. You think "OK, maybe her parents are mad at her for not asking permission to get married or not presenting the groom to them before doing it or something". No. They are all sad because the family dog just died. Very sad. Ridiculously sad, given the circumstances. In fact so sad, that the father of the bride, an obscure poet, reads a poem dedicated to the dog at dinner. No toasts for the newly wed, no "let's get to know each other, after all we're relatives now". A freaking speech in the memory of the dog. In the next scenes we are confirmed that the family of the girl is also a bit suspicious about the boy. And they are both suspicious regarding his love to her, but also about his political views. Although the father seems a romanian partizan, he seems to dislike the boy's family for ... being romanians. By now we realize that this is not only supposed to be about a wedding, the makers want to maker other points too (remember the words "they want"). Almost all the characters we meet later have a similar attitude. And the romanian side seems to dislike the moldavians too and see themselves as superior... Well at least except when they don't dislike them. They like them now, dislike them later, then like them again and so on.
In this whole soup of mixed opinions and conflicts, a character stands out: the husband of the brides sister, a mob like figure, well dressed, well groomed, apparently wealthy etc. He pays for what the couple needs, he makes arrangements for the party etc. He looks like the caring big brother. Except that he's not. He also loves the bride. Not like a brother. He constantly chicanes the groom on all kinds of matters: his love for his bride, his political views, his origins. By now you start to believe: OK, this is what the movie's about. It is. And it's not. Only if it were about this, but every time the movie focuses on this aspect, something happens and shifts the focus towards the political again. Then comes back to sentimental and family relationships, and back again to the political, it's like a ping pong match. And it's annoying, confusing and damaging. By the end the film seems to be heading nowhere. You see there are 30 minutes left and you have the impression that the real plot, the real conflict is yet to be revealed. And it never is revealed. They go to the wedding party, all kinds of shenanigans happen without pointing the action to any direction and suddenly the film ends. And that's it.
If you read the review first and then see the movie, you'll probably don't understand much of what i've written here. If you watch the movie you'll probably see what i meant.
The Prestige (2006)
This reminds me of... Lance Armstrong?!?!...
This is going to be short, not much to say, the title of my post sums it all up. What i felt when i found out that the great American champion took performance enhancing drugs i also felt when that ridiculous number of hats in Tesla's garden appeared on the screen. I felt that the producers of this film cheated. And after years since first seeing this movie, it seems they got away with it... unlike Lance. Because the film still has a great score on this site and not only. Sure, there was some great tension and cleverness to it, the acting was pretty cool, nice costumes and so on, but... A CLONING MACHINE?!?!?!!!!!!! COME ON!!!
Avatar (2009)
A good movie.. and i'm being too kind about this
I'm starting to get fed up with this Avatar mania. I've seen people saying it's the best movie in the past 30 years, others that it's the best ever... who are you people who say that? are you kids or is it the first movie you ever saw in your life? how can you say that Avatar is better than works of art like Schindler's list, for example? The movie is good, that's about the most generous description i can make to it. Only good, because it's a bit incomplete, it's not a whole. Obviously, i should be a lunatic not to like what the eye can see, the effects, the innovations, all the visual and audio stuff is just brilliant, it's surely worth the tons of money spent on it. But when it comes to the idea of the film, the doubts begin to appear. Let's be honest, it's just not the most original story. A strong civilization invades one that is rather primitive, but a hero appears and leads the underdogs to victory and saves the day. It also has the love story (it seems that Cameron can't really make a good movie without a love story in it). So, story wise, it's a pretty dull and predictable movie, also pretty unrealistic, like most movies of it's kind (i mean... let's be serious, that's never gonna happen, a bunch of archers beating up a modern army like that in this movie). Even though it had fantastic landscapes and creatures, fast scenes, great effects etc. i just didn't say "OH... MY... GOD!" not even once, i enjoyed it though, but it didn't moved me, it didn't captured me, i didn't forgot about myself when watching it, i didn't thought about it after leaving the cinema. It's the perfect example that money can't buy happiness.
Wuthering Heights (2009)
Watching this touched me...
... because it remembered some ideas in the book that touched me (ideas like .. humanity sometimes gives birth to inhumane, a selfish, fanatic love can produce misery etc.). i'm having a feeling of compassion for those who will watch this without having read the book first, because the poor souls won't understand what the story is really about. i absolutely dislike the way heathcliff was portrayed (and not only in this version, i never saw a wuthering heights movie in which heathcliff is heathcliff, as i imagine him in the book) and don't entirely agree with the actor chosen.. don't know why, it's something about his face, he's too beautiful and soft, the heathcliff i always imagined is much rougher and less macho. even if the guy does his best (and i must say he has a great voice, especially at the end of the movie or whenever he is playing the old heathcliff), it's just not enough. cathy is, like someone in another comment perfectly described the cathy in this movie, like a teenage girl swept of her feet by a handsome boy, she doesn't fight him enough, she doesn't seem to be able to match him. the cathy in the book was able to make heathcliff stop whatever he was doing and knee in front of her, here the roles seem to have changed, she's like an obeying wife who does whatever her husband tells her to do. she doesn't seem to have a will of her own, she just follows him. and that's wrong, in the book they were both equally stubborn and strong-willed. overall, i'll give this movie a 6, but just because, like i said before, it reminded me about the book, which i'll start to read in about... 1 minute or so..
The Break-Up (2006)
I'd rather watch the news than this
Everything seems unfinished in this movie. It's like they were pressured into making it in half the time it needed. It's kind of a romantic comedy, but with 50% of the comedy and 50% of the romance that a typical romantic comedy offers. Most of the romantic scenes are only half romantic and most of the comedy scenes are (you guessed it!) half hilarious. The story has no spark, we've seen it in thousands of movies. It's as innovative as a movie about a man who wakes up 10 minutes later than usual in the morning and he tries to get to work on time. Now imagine that if a movie on that subject would be made, that movie would end just before the guy gets to the building where he works. It would be even more disappointing... After getting bored for 1 hour and a half, you would at least expect something extraordinary to happen when he finally gets to his office (i don't know, something like shooting his boss or a tsunami destroying his work place), anything that would just make you say: "okay, i got bored the whole movie, but at least the end was worth." but that doesn't happen here. They just split-up and they meet after a couple of months and they say to each other how good they look. The End. I don't know... maybe the movie wasn't designed to be revealing, maybe it wasn't made to break the box office, but that kind of movie can at least entertain you with stupid but funny situations or with an ending that makes drop a tear. This doesn't happen here, when it ends you have the same feelings you would've had if you spent that 1,5 hour looking at a wall.
Cinderella Man (2005)
About the "over-emotional" character of the movie
I'm not going to comment about the movie itself, i think it has been said enough, also the revenues, the critics' reviews and the number of people who went to see the movies in cinemas says all about the quality of this beautiful movie. I can't agree with those who complain about the fact that this film was "over-emotional". If the life of a man who got from working on the docks and not being able sometimes to provide food for his children to winning the heavyweight crown doesn't strike you as extraordinarily emotional, then you must be as sensitive as a kitchen knife. Come on, dudes, this was the only way to put Braddock's life on camera on a realistic way.