So, as the great boyfriend I am, I agreed to watch all of Gossip Girl for my girlfriend. This comes after, as she thinks, I've "tortured" her with Star Wars and James Bond. I'm close to finishing off the second season, and have realised that this show is absolutely stupid. Yet I can't help watching it. I have a love-hate relationship with this show. It's garbage, makes no sense, characters are complete idiots for the sake of plot, yet I need to know what's going to happen next. I've made it this far, why not finish it off?
Spoilers Ahead.
For example, in the last hours of season 1, Serena (the main idiot of this show) comes forward with a problem. She has murdered someone while she was away, before when the tv show had started. Now like anyone, this peaked my interest. Up until now it had been about what sock looks good on what foot, and now suddenly a murder had been brought forth. This show had finally become acceptable! I scrambled to click next episode of my Netflix as the credits rolled up, leaving Serena's fate to be found somewhere in the next painful 45 minute bore fest. As usual, Netflix skips the opening credits for me and my heart skips a beat as the episode plays out. I have never been interested in a show about girls with guys that are one step away from looking like girls. And then the truth about the murder has come out. Finally.
It was a fucking joke. Serena has supposedly become a murderer because she offered some of the victim's drugs to him. That's it. Like they couldn't even god damn let it be her drugs and maybe someone else was out to poison her and she stupidly offered the drugs to the victim. No, because she reached over and gave the drugs that were owned by the victim TO THE VICTIM AND HE USED IT ALL HIMSELF SHE DECIDED SHE MUST BE THE MURDERER! Serena is the most self centered asswipe that has ever had the grace of becoming a main character. If this didn't make matters worse, after she talks to the parents of the victim about it, and they agree she had no fault in hell with the whole "murder", she STILL takes it upon herself to take credit for the murder. You remember those girls in school that would pretend they had problems just for attention and shit. Yeah well that's Serena, except imagine that high school girl was ten times more idiotic.
"oh my god how was your summer Sernea?" Asked Blair.
"Oh I killed somebody and I feel really bad. Like oh my god!" Replies Serena, with fake god damn tears rushing from those lying evil eyes.
The only way I could see that she would blame herself is that she is SOOOOOO stupid that she thinks the victim didn't die from the drugs, but because she's developed supernatural powers like Rogue from X-Men and kills everyone they touch. How unfortunate for them (and me) that all she is, is a stupid moron.
Fast forward to Season 2. So Dan and Serena are really close with the new teacher called Rachel. And that's fine, I was friends with some of my teachers too. But then Blair (Serena's friend) creates a false rumor that Dan (Serena's boyfriend) is doing the "extra credit" with Rachel, and shit goes crazy. But after this rumour comes out, Dan decides to go OUT with Rachel to a cafe to TALK and to COMFORT HER. Because talking in a classroom, or better yet, IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SCHOOL HALLWAY was too suss. No one will ever suspect a student and a teacher in a cafe doing anything mischievous. And what do ya know, Serena waltzes past and decides that Dan is obviously on his way to getting that "extra credit" and instead of talking to Dan about it (the sensible route) Serena decides to take photos and show the whole school (stupid moronic route for plot and more seasons).
I have never met more stupid characters or more unnecessary plots then in this show. I get paid more per hour then Serena has IQ level. And I get underpaid. I'm honestly not sure why the show keeps saying Dan is the smart one. But then again I guess if you're smarter then everyone else (and everyone else doesn't even reach the average IQ level) then you would be declared a genius too.
I'm mostly dissapointed in the screenwriters and the people who approve the scripts. Obviously not a lot of thought has been put into this. Well, actually that's not true. A LOT of thought has been put into this, but into how we can make Serena and Dan broken up for the 50th time, because Susan the new girl came up with this killer episode where Dan meets a hooker and saves her from her pimps. But it's okay, because George, the other screenwriter, has a way to bring them back together the episode after that! Damn! We just created 2 extra episodes for this season from this! YAY! Now let's also just throw in Chuck squinting at something because he refuses to wear glasses, Nate deciding what girl he wants to get with, Rufus doing his comedic relief job, Jenny complaining about something that will mean nothing in the next episode, and Blair being a rich bitch. None of what these characters do will matter in the long run. Only the first episode of the season and the last episode of the season matter. Everything else is just filler episodes. Remember that scene in FRIENDS where Monica pretends to be Rachel and says "oh I love Ross! I hate Ross! blah blah blah"? Yeah well this is that, but on a whole scale of every character doing that. Dan and Serena, on and off together. Chuck and Blair, on and off together. Nate and Vanessa, on and off together. Jenny and her ideas, on and off together. Plot and character, on and off together. Rufus and Lily, on and off together.
And another point, does anyone care who Gossip Girl is? Like audience members or characters? Not once so far has any of the characters given a damn about who Gossip Girl is, and me as an audience member hasn't even once cared about it. It entered my mind once, but was pushed out by stupidity from this show.
All in all, I do like the show a bit. Like it's entertaining, it's funny, it's interesting. Just people are stupid for plot devices. People normally don't think or do like this, but because it's in the interest of plot twists and "oh no she didn't" scenes, it completely ruins my experience with this show. I can only see it getting worse from here on out. No wonder Chuck gets drunk so much, that's the only way this show can be viewed.
Wednesday 24 February 2016
Thursday 20 August 2015
The Man From U.N.C.L.E.
The Man From U.N.C.L.E. is directed and written by Guy Ritchie, and stars Henry Cavill, Armie Hammer and Hugh Grant. It was released on Thursday 14th of August in Australia.
The Man From U.N.C.L.E. tells the story of two secret agents, both on opposite sides of the Cold War, who are forced to work together to stop an evil criminal who has a nuclear device.
I was really excited for this movie when I first saw the trailer for it as I love spy movies to death. I could watch spy movies all day and not be bored afterwards. And this is a proper spy movie of the 60's, with it's silly gadgets, and it's silly jokes, and it's silly nature. It's probably even more silly due to the fact that its partly written by Guy Ritchie, who is a great writer of silly comedic-serious movies, such as "Snatch" and "Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels". And while the jokes didn't hit as well as they do in his other films, they still come off well enough to entertain. Henry Cavill was good as the brilliant, sophisticated spy, which he played very well. The first chase in this scene was absolutely brilliant and got me hooked into it, with back stories playing out while silly humour was used to keep the action and chase interesting.
There was some problems with this movie though. One notable problem is because of the silly hunour used throughout the movie, it makes the serious bits of the movie less important. We don't feel as much as attachement to the characters because we haven't had a chance to really get to know them, with so much humour and back and forth insults filling up scenes. The plot was also something we have all seen and heard before, not offering much to the table. Actually, this plot is derivative of every James Bond movie in existence.
Another thing that worked in the beginning but then became less and less effective was the use of "flashback reveals" where they go to a flashback to reveal certain things that wasn't revealed at first. This was good the first time, as they filled in scenes so you could understand what the plan was. This became less and less effective, after they used it about 3 or 4 times. It got to the point where I felt like they removed half the scenes so they could add them in these "flashback reveals" just so the audience could go "oh, nice twist there!"
The characters were very bland as well. Besides the back story given at the start, not much more is revealed about them, and the rest of the movie is about the mission.
The directing of action scenes were very annoying with shaky cam involved, but used in such a way that it focused more on the trees then the action. The camera would be following someone riding a bike and it would shake so much that all I saw was trees and the sky. How this added to the value of the film, we will never know.
All in all, The Man From U.N.C.L.E. is a silly fun experience, but riveted with annoying loopholes and action scenes that requires slow motion to see what on earth is going on. I would reccomend watching this movie when it comes out on DVD, there are more important films out at the momment. I give this film a 3 out of 5.
The Man From U.N.C.L.E. tells the story of two secret agents, both on opposite sides of the Cold War, who are forced to work together to stop an evil criminal who has a nuclear device.
I was really excited for this movie when I first saw the trailer for it as I love spy movies to death. I could watch spy movies all day and not be bored afterwards. And this is a proper spy movie of the 60's, with it's silly gadgets, and it's silly jokes, and it's silly nature. It's probably even more silly due to the fact that its partly written by Guy Ritchie, who is a great writer of silly comedic-serious movies, such as "Snatch" and "Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels". And while the jokes didn't hit as well as they do in his other films, they still come off well enough to entertain. Henry Cavill was good as the brilliant, sophisticated spy, which he played very well. The first chase in this scene was absolutely brilliant and got me hooked into it, with back stories playing out while silly humour was used to keep the action and chase interesting.
There was some problems with this movie though. One notable problem is because of the silly hunour used throughout the movie, it makes the serious bits of the movie less important. We don't feel as much as attachement to the characters because we haven't had a chance to really get to know them, with so much humour and back and forth insults filling up scenes. The plot was also something we have all seen and heard before, not offering much to the table. Actually, this plot is derivative of every James Bond movie in existence.
Another thing that worked in the beginning but then became less and less effective was the use of "flashback reveals" where they go to a flashback to reveal certain things that wasn't revealed at first. This was good the first time, as they filled in scenes so you could understand what the plan was. This became less and less effective, after they used it about 3 or 4 times. It got to the point where I felt like they removed half the scenes so they could add them in these "flashback reveals" just so the audience could go "oh, nice twist there!"
The characters were very bland as well. Besides the back story given at the start, not much more is revealed about them, and the rest of the movie is about the mission.
The directing of action scenes were very annoying with shaky cam involved, but used in such a way that it focused more on the trees then the action. The camera would be following someone riding a bike and it would shake so much that all I saw was trees and the sky. How this added to the value of the film, we will never know.
All in all, The Man From U.N.C.L.E. is a silly fun experience, but riveted with annoying loopholes and action scenes that requires slow motion to see what on earth is going on. I would reccomend watching this movie when it comes out on DVD, there are more important films out at the momment. I give this film a 3 out of 5.
Sunday 14 June 2015
Movie Review: Inside Out
Inside Out stars Amy Poehler among a cast of voice actors all under the direction of Peter Docter. I viewed this movie early, but the Australian release date is 18th of June 2015.
Inside Out is an animated movie about a young girl called Riley. It explores the idea that emotions are people running around in your head controlling you from a console, and Riley's console is dominated by Joy. That is, until Joy and Sadness venture into the open of Riley's mind and must find their way back to the console to stop Riley from ruining her life.
The idea behind this film with the mind being a giant computer full of memories and various characters who control it is ingenious. This is a well thought out film and Peter Docter really thought out the idea before preparing it for the screen. The screenplay is brilliant with lots of jokes for kids and adults. I was not bored in this film for a moment, and it really took me by surprise how heartfelt the movie was while still being hilarious and entertaining for kids. This film really pulled at my heart strings, definetely in the third act with certain character choices and the way the people are designed.
Which leads me to another thing, this movie is designed well, with characters showing real emotion, enough to make someone like me actually feel what they are going through.
There isn't much wrong I can say that is wrong with this film, except that I do feel like some characters annoyed me, definetely Sadness. They were meant to be loved by the end of the film or felt pity for them, but I just didn't feel it.
All in all, this is getting a 4 out of 5 Reons. I would highly reccomend taking your family to see this film, or even your friends or partners, as this is a film everyone should experience together.
Inside Out is an animated movie about a young girl called Riley. It explores the idea that emotions are people running around in your head controlling you from a console, and Riley's console is dominated by Joy. That is, until Joy and Sadness venture into the open of Riley's mind and must find their way back to the console to stop Riley from ruining her life.
The idea behind this film with the mind being a giant computer full of memories and various characters who control it is ingenious. This is a well thought out film and Peter Docter really thought out the idea before preparing it for the screen. The screenplay is brilliant with lots of jokes for kids and adults. I was not bored in this film for a moment, and it really took me by surprise how heartfelt the movie was while still being hilarious and entertaining for kids. This film really pulled at my heart strings, definetely in the third act with certain character choices and the way the people are designed.
Which leads me to another thing, this movie is designed well, with characters showing real emotion, enough to make someone like me actually feel what they are going through.
There isn't much wrong I can say that is wrong with this film, except that I do feel like some characters annoyed me, definetely Sadness. They were meant to be loved by the end of the film or felt pity for them, but I just didn't feel it.
All in all, this is getting a 4 out of 5 Reons. I would highly reccomend taking your family to see this film, or even your friends or partners, as this is a film everyone should experience together.
Thursday 11 June 2015
Movie Review: Hot Pursuit
Hot Pursuit stars Sofia Vergara and Reese Witherspoon and is directed by Anne Fletcher. It was released in Australia on the 11th of June 2015.
Hot Pursuit stars Reese Witherspoon, as a by-the-book cop who has the legacy of her father bearing over her head. She is given the job of protecting Daniella (Sofia Vergara) who is the wife of an informant going into witness protection. Both are polar opposites, which is where the comedy tries to come from.
This was a very dull comedy, from start to end. The script was very bad, and didn't offer much originality from any other movies of its kind. I swear there must be at least one of those "polar opposite turn buddies" comedies every year for the American summer season, and 90% of them fail. Reese Witherspoon plays what is essentailly Spock from Star Trek, someone who follows the rule book and knows every section of the law off by heart. There is nothing new about her character that is original or funny. Sofia Vergara is back in another comedy where she plays another Columbian woman where the same jokes are used to no efffect at all. Modern Family already squeezed whatever jokes they could make about her and her heritage, and this film offers no more insight into that. I find that many film makers seem to throw Sofia Vergara into the same boat of being the loud Columbian woman, and it's sad to not see her offer up anything else.
I am confident to say I did not laugh once this movie, and if I did, it may have been from laughing at other people laughing at this film. This film reminds me of an Adam Sandler movie - but worse. Cheap jokes are used, and they often retreat back to slapstick or bad physical comedy to try to win over audiences. How the movie progresses makes no sense either, such as how certain characters manage to find out information or the location of others. The script writers basically wanted to progress the script so they could offer up more cheap jokes, so looked over the fact that there was so many plot holes.
Now I know I shouldn't be hard of comedies, because they're comedies right? They're not Academy Award winning movies like 12 Years A Slave or The Departed. But that doesn't excuse the fact that this movie is absolutely TERRIBLE.
This movie gets a 1/2 Reon out of 5 Reons. I would suggest to never watch this film ever, not even if it was in a dollar bin somewhere, it's not worth any money and shouldn't be on anybody's shelf.
Hot Pursuit stars Reese Witherspoon, as a by-the-book cop who has the legacy of her father bearing over her head. She is given the job of protecting Daniella (Sofia Vergara) who is the wife of an informant going into witness protection. Both are polar opposites, which is where the comedy tries to come from.
This was a very dull comedy, from start to end. The script was very bad, and didn't offer much originality from any other movies of its kind. I swear there must be at least one of those "polar opposite turn buddies" comedies every year for the American summer season, and 90% of them fail. Reese Witherspoon plays what is essentailly Spock from Star Trek, someone who follows the rule book and knows every section of the law off by heart. There is nothing new about her character that is original or funny. Sofia Vergara is back in another comedy where she plays another Columbian woman where the same jokes are used to no efffect at all. Modern Family already squeezed whatever jokes they could make about her and her heritage, and this film offers no more insight into that. I find that many film makers seem to throw Sofia Vergara into the same boat of being the loud Columbian woman, and it's sad to not see her offer up anything else.
I am confident to say I did not laugh once this movie, and if I did, it may have been from laughing at other people laughing at this film. This film reminds me of an Adam Sandler movie - but worse. Cheap jokes are used, and they often retreat back to slapstick or bad physical comedy to try to win over audiences. How the movie progresses makes no sense either, such as how certain characters manage to find out information or the location of others. The script writers basically wanted to progress the script so they could offer up more cheap jokes, so looked over the fact that there was so many plot holes.
Now I know I shouldn't be hard of comedies, because they're comedies right? They're not Academy Award winning movies like 12 Years A Slave or The Departed. But that doesn't excuse the fact that this movie is absolutely TERRIBLE.
This movie gets a 1/2 Reon out of 5 Reons. I would suggest to never watch this film ever, not even if it was in a dollar bin somewhere, it's not worth any money and shouldn't be on anybody's shelf.
Wednesday 10 June 2015
In- Depth Discussion: Don Jon
Don Jon is directed and written by Joseph Gordon Levitt, as well as starring him along with Scarlet Johannson and Julianne Moore. It was released in 2013 and I am reviewing the Blu Ray edition.
Don Jon is a masterpiece, plain and simple. As soon as this movie hit shelves, I brought it immediately on blu ray. Joseph Gordon Levitt is one of my favourite actors ever, and after watching this and his tv show Hit Record, I am pretty sure he is a fantastic creator of film.
Don Jon is about a 20 something man called Jon, who is called the Don because of his charm with women, hitting the clubs most weeks and always laying with a girl at the end of it. After a failed attempt with one of the girls at the club, played by Scarlet Johannson, he becomes obsessed with this girl he failed with, and is relentless in trying to get with her. The only problem: He has an addiction to porn.
This is a spoiler review, but I have referred to the spoilered sections of the review and in depth discussion in RED. The rest is as a normal non spoilered review.
This film is probably one of the finest at exploring the ideas between men and women in relationships and just at trying to get with each other. And it's all true. While I can't speak from the female perspective, I have talked to one of two females about the movie, and they agree that the female side of this movie is on par with reality. The idea of men being out for sex and meeting this "Man Image" that they must have to secure girls, while females are out for love create a symmetry lifestyle of each side of the relationship. Jon is crazy about porn, and trying to recreate his porn fantasies in girls, without realising that porn is fake. On the other hand you have his girlfriend for the major part of the film, Barbara Sugarman, who is crazy about the soppy romantic movies, and is trying to create her ideal romantic relationship with Jon, even though she doesn't realise that her movies aren't real life. Both are told that each other's "fantasies" are nothing more then fake, with both not accepting that fate. It shows that we grow up with a certain idea of what our lives and relationships should be, always rating it up against something, whether it be someone else's relationship or the media's perception of relationships, such as movies or porn. In one scene, Jon's family is around the table eating lunch while an advertisement is playing for a burger with a half naked lady swinging the burger around looking sexy. Jon and his father is watching the advertisement with interest, while the women pay no attention to it and see no interest in what they see as an ad for a burger. While the guys see a sexy lady, the women see a burger.
Another excellent thing in this movie is the directing. Joseph Gordon Levitt has created his movie around Jon's schedule, which he refers to at the start, consisting of him going to church, working out, going to clubs, watching porn and eventually adding events such as night school. The schedule continues, showing his weekly events and how they change throughout the course of the movie. At the start of the movie, he regularly goes through his weekly events without any interruptions. By about the middle of the movie, Barbara Sugarman is present in most of his events, or his events have changed around so that he can meet what she expects of him. For example, at the start of the movie he is going to the gym by himself and attending church with his family. By about the second act of the movie, he is at the gym with Barbara and attending church with his family AND Barbara.
Another thing that is briefly explored in this movie is the idea of tissues and paper towels. While I haven't explored this theme much, this is a continuing theme, while small. The only time tissues or paper towels are present in the movie is when Jon is pleasuring himself. Besides that, it is hardly present. At one stage, Jon has washed his hands in the University toilets and goes to get some paper towels and discovers it is empty. I believe this explores the theme that men only think of tissues and paper towels as an object to help them with the act of pleasuring oneself.
An interesting character that I feel is not explored enough (or the idea about her is not explored enough) is Jon's younger sister, who is always, always on her phone and only has one line of dialogue at the end where she reveals what she truly thought about Barbara Sugarman. My thinking behind this is that we're given 3 generations of love and relationships: the parents, who are married so long they're past the honeymoon stage and are just comfortable with each other and everything; the young adults, who are out looking for what each gender has grown up with thinking (men - porn and sex, women - love and marriage) and aren't comfortable with anything that is what they aren't getting, which leads to people pretending to be who they aren't; and the teenagers (Jon's younger sister) who is in the technology era, where relationships are half hidden behind phones and computers, with facebook messenger and texting the main part of their communication. An interesting idea, but I'm still exploring it.
A small theme explored is the idea that we have to pretend to be people to make our other halves happy. This is present throughout the whole film, in which Don is told not to do certain things, as it ruins Barbara's perception of the "perfect relationship" and Barbara has to become this sexy, perfect girl to help Jon's perception of the "perfect relationship". In one scene, Barbara is talking to her friends in a club while overlooking Jon, and mentioning that he works out and looks good, while attending night school for a better job and the two have not engaged in sex yet. Barbara suddenly looks like she has the perfect boyfriend, while this is just a image that Jon is to potray for Barbara to be happy. In another scene, Jon is checking Barbara out with his friends at a club and saids how she is perfect, a "dime" with perfect breasts, face and bottom. His friends believe that she is the best girlfriend ever because of the sex appeal, Both are looking at and determining the idea of their perfect partner from different qualities, with both of them being a false representation of what each partner truly is.
Don Jon is a fantastic movie, with excellent directing choices, an excellent script full of colourful dialogue and debates about relationships and love that will hit reality well without seeming fake. Joseph Gordon Levitt and Scarlett Johannson are FANTASTIC as the main cast, with Julianne Moore brilliant as well. There was never a dull moment in this film, and females have told me that the idea about females in this film is true, as is the male aspect. I feel that this is probably one of the best movie representations about how each gender thinks about relationships and their partners, while not favoring one gender too much. If you have not seen this film yet, I implore you to go out and rent it, or buy it on blu ray, because I am pretty sure this is a must have in any film lover's collection. The themes and ideas explored in this film are brilliant and creatively woven together as to be something that can be explored deeper and deeper everytime someone watches this film. Please, see this film, and if you have seen this film, I hope my spoiler in depth discussion has given some insight into the film. If there is anything you would like to contribute, or point out, or say "Reon, I believe that is a shit theme and isn't really a theme" please say so in the comments. I always love discussing film and am always excited to hear new ideas about film.
Don Jon gets 5 out of 5 Reons. A must see phenomenal film..
Don Jon is a masterpiece, plain and simple. As soon as this movie hit shelves, I brought it immediately on blu ray. Joseph Gordon Levitt is one of my favourite actors ever, and after watching this and his tv show Hit Record, I am pretty sure he is a fantastic creator of film.
Don Jon is about a 20 something man called Jon, who is called the Don because of his charm with women, hitting the clubs most weeks and always laying with a girl at the end of it. After a failed attempt with one of the girls at the club, played by Scarlet Johannson, he becomes obsessed with this girl he failed with, and is relentless in trying to get with her. The only problem: He has an addiction to porn.
This is a spoiler review, but I have referred to the spoilered sections of the review and in depth discussion in RED. The rest is as a normal non spoilered review.
This film is probably one of the finest at exploring the ideas between men and women in relationships and just at trying to get with each other. And it's all true. While I can't speak from the female perspective, I have talked to one of two females about the movie, and they agree that the female side of this movie is on par with reality. The idea of men being out for sex and meeting this "Man Image" that they must have to secure girls, while females are out for love create a symmetry lifestyle of each side of the relationship. Jon is crazy about porn, and trying to recreate his porn fantasies in girls, without realising that porn is fake. On the other hand you have his girlfriend for the major part of the film, Barbara Sugarman, who is crazy about the soppy romantic movies, and is trying to create her ideal romantic relationship with Jon, even though she doesn't realise that her movies aren't real life. Both are told that each other's "fantasies" are nothing more then fake, with both not accepting that fate. It shows that we grow up with a certain idea of what our lives and relationships should be, always rating it up against something, whether it be someone else's relationship or the media's perception of relationships, such as movies or porn. In one scene, Jon's family is around the table eating lunch while an advertisement is playing for a burger with a half naked lady swinging the burger around looking sexy. Jon and his father is watching the advertisement with interest, while the women pay no attention to it and see no interest in what they see as an ad for a burger. While the guys see a sexy lady, the women see a burger.
Another excellent thing in this movie is the directing. Joseph Gordon Levitt has created his movie around Jon's schedule, which he refers to at the start, consisting of him going to church, working out, going to clubs, watching porn and eventually adding events such as night school. The schedule continues, showing his weekly events and how they change throughout the course of the movie. At the start of the movie, he regularly goes through his weekly events without any interruptions. By about the middle of the movie, Barbara Sugarman is present in most of his events, or his events have changed around so that he can meet what she expects of him. For example, at the start of the movie he is going to the gym by himself and attending church with his family. By about the second act of the movie, he is at the gym with Barbara and attending church with his family AND Barbara.
Another thing that is briefly explored in this movie is the idea of tissues and paper towels. While I haven't explored this theme much, this is a continuing theme, while small. The only time tissues or paper towels are present in the movie is when Jon is pleasuring himself. Besides that, it is hardly present. At one stage, Jon has washed his hands in the University toilets and goes to get some paper towels and discovers it is empty. I believe this explores the theme that men only think of tissues and paper towels as an object to help them with the act of pleasuring oneself.
An interesting character that I feel is not explored enough (or the idea about her is not explored enough) is Jon's younger sister, who is always, always on her phone and only has one line of dialogue at the end where she reveals what she truly thought about Barbara Sugarman. My thinking behind this is that we're given 3 generations of love and relationships: the parents, who are married so long they're past the honeymoon stage and are just comfortable with each other and everything; the young adults, who are out looking for what each gender has grown up with thinking (men - porn and sex, women - love and marriage) and aren't comfortable with anything that is what they aren't getting, which leads to people pretending to be who they aren't; and the teenagers (Jon's younger sister) who is in the technology era, where relationships are half hidden behind phones and computers, with facebook messenger and texting the main part of their communication. An interesting idea, but I'm still exploring it.
A small theme explored is the idea that we have to pretend to be people to make our other halves happy. This is present throughout the whole film, in which Don is told not to do certain things, as it ruins Barbara's perception of the "perfect relationship" and Barbara has to become this sexy, perfect girl to help Jon's perception of the "perfect relationship". In one scene, Barbara is talking to her friends in a club while overlooking Jon, and mentioning that he works out and looks good, while attending night school for a better job and the two have not engaged in sex yet. Barbara suddenly looks like she has the perfect boyfriend, while this is just a image that Jon is to potray for Barbara to be happy. In another scene, Jon is checking Barbara out with his friends at a club and saids how she is perfect, a "dime" with perfect breasts, face and bottom. His friends believe that she is the best girlfriend ever because of the sex appeal, Both are looking at and determining the idea of their perfect partner from different qualities, with both of them being a false representation of what each partner truly is.
Don Jon is a fantastic movie, with excellent directing choices, an excellent script full of colourful dialogue and debates about relationships and love that will hit reality well without seeming fake. Joseph Gordon Levitt and Scarlett Johannson are FANTASTIC as the main cast, with Julianne Moore brilliant as well. There was never a dull moment in this film, and females have told me that the idea about females in this film is true, as is the male aspect. I feel that this is probably one of the best movie representations about how each gender thinks about relationships and their partners, while not favoring one gender too much. If you have not seen this film yet, I implore you to go out and rent it, or buy it on blu ray, because I am pretty sure this is a must have in any film lover's collection. The themes and ideas explored in this film are brilliant and creatively woven together as to be something that can be explored deeper and deeper everytime someone watches this film. Please, see this film, and if you have seen this film, I hope my spoiler in depth discussion has given some insight into the film. If there is anything you would like to contribute, or point out, or say "Reon, I believe that is a shit theme and isn't really a theme" please say so in the comments. I always love discussing film and am always excited to hear new ideas about film.
Don Jon gets 5 out of 5 Reons. A must see phenomenal film..
Thursday 19 February 2015
Jupiter Ascending Movie Review
Jupiter Ascending stars Channing Tatum, Mila Kunis, Sean Bean and Edddie Redmayne and is directed by the Wachowski brothers. It was released in Australia on the 19th of Feburary, 2015.
Jupiter Ascending is about a young woman called Jupiter (played by Mila Kunis) who, after being saved by a Splicer called Caine (Channing Tatnum) must confront her destiny as leader of the Earth and stop Balem Abrasax (Eddie Redmayne) from controlling the planet for his own pleasures.
Now this was one of my most anticipated movies of the year, being directed by the Wachowski brothers, who did 'The Matrix' and it's sequels (I still like the sequels a bit, even though some of the stuff is a bit ridiculous) and Cloud Atlas, a film I still don't know if I like or not. After viewing it, like Cloud Atlas, it took me a while to understand if I liked the next film from these brothers who are slowly degrading into terrible movies. The action scenes were fun to watch, and the ideas that they had created in this space opera, such as the tax file numbers, and the political government of the universe, was quite interesting to watch. Also, the idea about where humans come from was a wonderful idea, and made me hugely invested in the film. The main problem with the film is actually the story. The background and ideas associated with it are worthy of a great space opera like Star Wars, but are beat down by the characters and the story, which are the front lines that should draw the audience in.
To start off with, the story was incredibly predictable, with not much new offering. If you have seen the trailer, you have seen the better part of the movie, and the character development that takes place. I felt like Jupiter, while defending for herself a couple of times, was very much a damsel in distress, having Caine, the Splicer, rescue her numerous times, after she herself got into the situations. I wish Jupiter had more of a big epic fight in the ending then what she got, which was more of a cat fight with a villain I swear is secretly gay.
Which leads me to the villain, played by Eddie Redmayne. I didn't understand his idea as a villain at all. What he wanted, why he wanted it, what his purpose was. He was just a guy who wanted the planet Earth for something it was created for, and is now being attacked for it. I won't go too much into detail about it, but I felt like it should have been explored a bit more with more of a debate. Also, his acting was not the greatest. I'm not sure if this was due to the director or Eddie himself, but the villain just seemed so lame and unimportant to the whole idea. The voice that he put on as well seemed stupid, but I feel like he was doing that because he's meant to be thousands of years old and had to have this old man voice.
The splicer's were very interesting, being humans mixed with a DNA to give them powers, such as Caine, who is mixed with a Lycan, which gives him awesome smelling abilities (it sounds better in the movie).One of the best scenes in the movie was near the start, where Caine rescues Jupiter (of course) and there is an epic chase with jet boots. The jet boots was AMAZING in this movie and put to very good use. It is good to see the Wachowski brothers still have brilliant ideas, even if their characters sometimes lack depth.
Another problem with the film, was how much green screen was used. It started to become very obvious and annoying at times, definitely in scenes where it was just two characters talking, and they were standing in front of a green screen that stood out more then the actors. I actually swear the house they were in at the end was green screened as well, and it seems that the film makers spent soooo much money on cgi and action, that they forgot to set up some actual stages to record on.
The action scenes were also very few and far between, with maybe too much political issues, even though I didn't mind that. And even then, some of the political stuff went over my head, such as people betraying others and suddenly forgetting about said betrayal moments after. I'm not sure if it's just me missing something, but I did feel like I was falling behind, and nothing was mentioned about it when I looked up the plot.
All in all, Jupiter Ascending is a fun film to look at, and has marvelous ideas with the splicers and the ideas about humans, but lacks in characters and the actual story. The acting was alright, but nothing stood out as amazing.
I would give this a 2.5 out of 5 stars, and would recommend waiting for the blu-ray/ DVD release, or if you wish to see the action scenes on the IMAX screen (which aren't that impressive to be honest) watch it in cinemas.
Jupiter Ascending is about a young woman called Jupiter (played by Mila Kunis) who, after being saved by a Splicer called Caine (Channing Tatnum) must confront her destiny as leader of the Earth and stop Balem Abrasax (Eddie Redmayne) from controlling the planet for his own pleasures.
Now this was one of my most anticipated movies of the year, being directed by the Wachowski brothers, who did 'The Matrix' and it's sequels (I still like the sequels a bit, even though some of the stuff is a bit ridiculous) and Cloud Atlas, a film I still don't know if I like or not. After viewing it, like Cloud Atlas, it took me a while to understand if I liked the next film from these brothers who are slowly degrading into terrible movies. The action scenes were fun to watch, and the ideas that they had created in this space opera, such as the tax file numbers, and the political government of the universe, was quite interesting to watch. Also, the idea about where humans come from was a wonderful idea, and made me hugely invested in the film. The main problem with the film is actually the story. The background and ideas associated with it are worthy of a great space opera like Star Wars, but are beat down by the characters and the story, which are the front lines that should draw the audience in.
To start off with, the story was incredibly predictable, with not much new offering. If you have seen the trailer, you have seen the better part of the movie, and the character development that takes place. I felt like Jupiter, while defending for herself a couple of times, was very much a damsel in distress, having Caine, the Splicer, rescue her numerous times, after she herself got into the situations. I wish Jupiter had more of a big epic fight in the ending then what she got, which was more of a cat fight with a villain I swear is secretly gay.
Which leads me to the villain, played by Eddie Redmayne. I didn't understand his idea as a villain at all. What he wanted, why he wanted it, what his purpose was. He was just a guy who wanted the planet Earth for something it was created for, and is now being attacked for it. I won't go too much into detail about it, but I felt like it should have been explored a bit more with more of a debate. Also, his acting was not the greatest. I'm not sure if this was due to the director or Eddie himself, but the villain just seemed so lame and unimportant to the whole idea. The voice that he put on as well seemed stupid, but I feel like he was doing that because he's meant to be thousands of years old and had to have this old man voice.
The splicer's were very interesting, being humans mixed with a DNA to give them powers, such as Caine, who is mixed with a Lycan, which gives him awesome smelling abilities (it sounds better in the movie).One of the best scenes in the movie was near the start, where Caine rescues Jupiter (of course) and there is an epic chase with jet boots. The jet boots was AMAZING in this movie and put to very good use. It is good to see the Wachowski brothers still have brilliant ideas, even if their characters sometimes lack depth.
Another problem with the film, was how much green screen was used. It started to become very obvious and annoying at times, definitely in scenes where it was just two characters talking, and they were standing in front of a green screen that stood out more then the actors. I actually swear the house they were in at the end was green screened as well, and it seems that the film makers spent soooo much money on cgi and action, that they forgot to set up some actual stages to record on.
The action scenes were also very few and far between, with maybe too much political issues, even though I didn't mind that. And even then, some of the political stuff went over my head, such as people betraying others and suddenly forgetting about said betrayal moments after. I'm not sure if it's just me missing something, but I did feel like I was falling behind, and nothing was mentioned about it when I looked up the plot.
All in all, Jupiter Ascending is a fun film to look at, and has marvelous ideas with the splicers and the ideas about humans, but lacks in characters and the actual story. The acting was alright, but nothing stood out as amazing.
I would give this a 2.5 out of 5 stars, and would recommend waiting for the blu-ray/ DVD release, or if you wish to see the action scenes on the IMAX screen (which aren't that impressive to be honest) watch it in cinemas.
Tuesday 17 February 2015
Fifty Shades of Grey Movie Review
Fifty Shades of Grey stars Dakota Johnson and Jamie Dornan, and is directed by Sam-Taylor Johnson. The film was released in Australia 12th of February, 2015.
Fifty Shades of Grey is about a young woman called Anastasia who is given the chance to interview the millionaire "hottie" Christian Grey, after which they develop a relationship which becomes questionable after Anastasia learns the true nature of Christian Grey. He really likes BDSM. Even though it's only the softest, most civilized version of BDSM ever seen.
In all honesty, this movie was absolutely terrible. I've already heard from multiple sources that the book is terrible, but I had a slight hope that with a fresh set of eyes, maybe the film makers would make it bearable. They did not succeed. This movie was possibly the most boring movie I have ever encountered. I did not care for any of the characters, or the plot, or what was even going to happen next. Let me show you the basic idea that was discussed when writing the movie.
Anastasia meets up with Christian after some time has passed and they have not seen each other - Christian then wins her trust or whatever it is by doing some amazing things, like flying a helicopter or a plan or some stupid thing like that - Then Anastasia feels like she's gotta do some BDSM to balance out the amazing things that Christian is doing for her.
And that, my friends, is repeated at least three or four times in this movie. Not even in well thought out ways. Another thing that infuriated me, was the writing. The dialogue is sooo bad and sooo cheesy, I think at least 90% of the really soppy, really bad romantic movies have better dialogue. Actually, I feel like porn movies would have better dialogue and forwarding of the plot then this. Like I could believe some lady wanting to have sex with a pizza delivery guy. But this movie is next level stupid. There is no reason she would keep going back for this stuff. Honestly, the two of them hardly know each other. She keeps pushing it off as love that makes her go back to the BDSM, but in all honesty, she doesn't know much about his life, he doesn't take her out much, they don't really have any memories together other than him taking her for a helicopter ride one time. There is NO reason at all for her to love him enough to put up with his stupid BDSM ideas.
The acting was terrible, save for Dakota Johnson, who I actually enjoyed as Anastasia. She was that awkward weird sort of woman, that would make some situation funny just by being awkward. Hats off to her, and to her for the sex scenes, in which she had to reveal a lot of her body in.
Which leads me to another problem. The sex scenes. Where was the torture and punishment. I saw her get tied up, and I can't tell you how many couples I know who have done that. At one stage, she was tickled by a feather while tied up, and I almost spat out my popcorn at how crazy that was. If you can't tell, that was sarcasm. Because touching someone with a feather is not BDSM.
I will admit, I was intrigued by the whole workings of the 'Dominant' and 'Submissive' such as how she has to wait by the doors in a certain position and she has to do everything he tells her. Though, by the end I basically saw this as almost an idea about men controlling women without the idea of BDSM. I actually think it would have made a better movie if they had removed the BDSM, focused it on him being dominant in every aspect of her life, and how she was coping with it. Oh, and not listening to the nutcase who wrote this book, because I really really hated this.
Fifty Shades of Grey gets a 1 out of 5 stars, and that is just for Dakota Johnson's acting and charisma. I would suggest not seeing it at all, or if you must, download it. Or wait for it to be in the bargain bin. Because we definitely know it will be there. I'm going to go cry now.
Fifty Shades of Grey is about a young woman called Anastasia who is given the chance to interview the millionaire "hottie" Christian Grey, after which they develop a relationship which becomes questionable after Anastasia learns the true nature of Christian Grey. He really likes BDSM. Even though it's only the softest, most civilized version of BDSM ever seen.
In all honesty, this movie was absolutely terrible. I've already heard from multiple sources that the book is terrible, but I had a slight hope that with a fresh set of eyes, maybe the film makers would make it bearable. They did not succeed. This movie was possibly the most boring movie I have ever encountered. I did not care for any of the characters, or the plot, or what was even going to happen next. Let me show you the basic idea that was discussed when writing the movie.
Anastasia meets up with Christian after some time has passed and they have not seen each other - Christian then wins her trust or whatever it is by doing some amazing things, like flying a helicopter or a plan or some stupid thing like that - Then Anastasia feels like she's gotta do some BDSM to balance out the amazing things that Christian is doing for her.
And that, my friends, is repeated at least three or four times in this movie. Not even in well thought out ways. Another thing that infuriated me, was the writing. The dialogue is sooo bad and sooo cheesy, I think at least 90% of the really soppy, really bad romantic movies have better dialogue. Actually, I feel like porn movies would have better dialogue and forwarding of the plot then this. Like I could believe some lady wanting to have sex with a pizza delivery guy. But this movie is next level stupid. There is no reason she would keep going back for this stuff. Honestly, the two of them hardly know each other. She keeps pushing it off as love that makes her go back to the BDSM, but in all honesty, she doesn't know much about his life, he doesn't take her out much, they don't really have any memories together other than him taking her for a helicopter ride one time. There is NO reason at all for her to love him enough to put up with his stupid BDSM ideas.
The acting was terrible, save for Dakota Johnson, who I actually enjoyed as Anastasia. She was that awkward weird sort of woman, that would make some situation funny just by being awkward. Hats off to her, and to her for the sex scenes, in which she had to reveal a lot of her body in.
Which leads me to another problem. The sex scenes. Where was the torture and punishment. I saw her get tied up, and I can't tell you how many couples I know who have done that. At one stage, she was tickled by a feather while tied up, and I almost spat out my popcorn at how crazy that was. If you can't tell, that was sarcasm. Because touching someone with a feather is not BDSM.
I will admit, I was intrigued by the whole workings of the 'Dominant' and 'Submissive' such as how she has to wait by the doors in a certain position and she has to do everything he tells her. Though, by the end I basically saw this as almost an idea about men controlling women without the idea of BDSM. I actually think it would have made a better movie if they had removed the BDSM, focused it on him being dominant in every aspect of her life, and how she was coping with it. Oh, and not listening to the nutcase who wrote this book, because I really really hated this.
Fifty Shades of Grey gets a 1 out of 5 stars, and that is just for Dakota Johnson's acting and charisma. I would suggest not seeing it at all, or if you must, download it. Or wait for it to be in the bargain bin. Because we definitely know it will be there. I'm going to go cry now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)