Social
Tag: morgan
0
0%1
RED(2010) review
Synopsis: When his idyllic life is threatened by a high-tech assassin, former black-ops agent Frank Moses reassembles his old team in a last ditch effort to survive. RED seemed like a cheap version of The Losers at first glance, but then get a little over 30 minutes into the film and it is actually quite the opposite. The Winners. (Oooh...That was BAD) Anyway, the film wasn't exactly the most exciting film I've seen, considering it was a graphic novel adaptation, although nothing could be as bad as X-Men Origins: Wolverine, or The Fantastic Four, the ashcanned version. But hold on a second - I'm not saying this was BAD, I'm just saying it wasn't THAT good. Don't let that detract from seeing it though, because there were several segments within the film which made me chuckle, the reason for this was the awesomeness who was Mary Louis Parker. She made me laugh. She was funny. She was HIGHLARIOUS. Aside from that, there was little in this film which was impressive, other than the stylistic (or is it now becoming generic?) Comic-Book visuals, and that one awesomehellyeahbadass scene when John McClane walks out of the car while it's moving, THAT, was impressive. Not much to mention about RED, the performances were admirable, but felt somewhat forced, like they didn't even want to be there. I mean, fine, whatever, find another film to act in, I don't care. Screw you Morgan Freeman, you weren't even in this film that much anyway. Okay film, fun plot, good performances, MLP was funny. She was. 5.5/10 Kazed0
Cop Out (2010) review
Synopsis: A comedy about a veteran NYPD cop whose rare baseball card is stolen. Since it's his only hope to pay for his daughter's upcoming wedding, he recruits his partner to track down the thief, a memorabilia-obsessed gangster.
Being the first film Kevin Smith has Directed but hasn't actually written, but was equally awesome as his past Directorial feats.
Having gone through some problems with the original name "A Couple of Dicks", Kevin Smith once again had trouble with the freakin' MPAA because the name of his film 'offended' people.
Anyways, the film.
Bruce Willis and Tracy Morgan were both funny as hell, and the characters they portrayed suited them so well, Willis playing the hard-ass cop and Morgan playing the sidekick who seems to mess things up but then making them better by his fluke-ish approach to cop work.
There were some pretty cool action moments in the film, and this was all balanced out by an acceptable story, nothing to write home about, but reminded me more of a Miami Vice episode.
Funny, action filled film with some pretty cool moments which made this film a keeper for me.
6/10
Kazed.
0
Invictus review
Synopsis - Where to start with this film exactly then? I have to admit that I went into the movie with a few preconceptions of how I was going to feel about it. I'd heard good reviews and I'd heard terrible reviews, and I was more prone to take the latter on board. This is where you'd expect me to say I was pleasantly surprised and that the film turned out to be an inspiring piece of work, full of suspense and drama, with admirable performances from its stars, while drawing on an important political event. Well, you're wrong. Sort of, anyway. It was neither a great film, or an awful one. It sat between the two extremes, and not necessarily comfortably plodding along neutrally at half-pace, but zig-zagging forward and backward between the excellent and the down-right terrible. There are a couple of main points I feel I should tell you about this film. Firstly, this is a film about rugby. You can dress it up as a political and historical drama, but in the end, it is a sports film. Secondly (and I know I'm going to get a lot of stick for this), Freeman is terrible. There, I said it. To go back to the first point, this film is unashamedly about rugby. While I'm sure director Clint Eastwood would insist rugby is simply a device used to show how the problems of history and a country's guilt can always be reconciled, there's no denying that the sport itself holds the main impetus of the narrative and film as a whole. The final match goes on for around half an hour of the film for Christ's sake! Now I'm a massive rugby fan, and even though I was only eight at the time, I do remember the 1995 World Cup, and specifically the final, and therefore the way in which they created past events and the movie's attention to detail was very exciting for me. However, for anyone uninterested in the sport I can imagine the amount of screen time given to match sequences is simply far too long. As for the match sequences themselves, considering we are supposed to be watching the best teams in the world, the play looks incredibly sloppy. It looks almost like one of those bad video-recordings by a proud dad watching his 12-year-old son playing in Sunday league. Though rugby holds the centre stage of the film, I couldn't help feeling it was all a little watered down for the masses, as if the film felt the need to explain every little detail of the game to its audience. Also, I couldn't help laugh when South African captain Francois Pienaar, played by Matt Damon, in what was supposed to be an inspiring mid-match team-talk said "Forwards, you need to start scrumming!". WHAT DOES THAT EVEN MEAN? Some researcher somewhere obviously wasn't doing their job right. So, to go back to Freeman. I know he's treated as a rather holier-than-thou, untouchable, King Midas of an actor, but I honestly thought this was the worst performance I've ever seen him give. Granted, he looks like Mandela. And maybe he acts like Mandela. But that's all I can see. I don't see Mandela. I see Morgan Freeman trying to be Mandela. I know it was Mandela's personal request to have Freeman to play him in the film (hell, I'd probably do the same, right after Brad Pitt), but in all honesty, I think it was a mistake to cast such a recognisable face as the President. Freeman's depiction of Mandela generally consisted of him shuffling around, looking morose, which really started to grate on me. I understand both Freeman and Damon spent a considerable amount of time with their characters' real-life counterparts, so perhaps Freeman was doing an accurate job, but it just didn't work on screen for me. Freeman also brought a childlike innocence or naïvety to Mandela, which instead of appearing charming and peaceful, made the President appear more stupid and vulnerable. I know Mandela is a political legend, and an icon for a generation. His story definitely deserves telling too. However, if Freeman's representation of him is accurate, then maybe his personality just wasn't made for the screen. As for Damon, he was comparatively brilliant next to Freeman. I'll admit, I like Matt Damon anyway, and while it wasn't one of his best performances he didn't completely disgrace himself. His accent was passable and he was fairly believable as the Springbok captain. However, as I said for Freeman, perhaps it would have been better to see an unknown face playing such an icon, as it was rather amusing watching Jason Bourne (and Will Hunting for that matter) running around a rugby pitch. Aside from Freeman's performance, there was another huge problem for me in this movie, and that was that the first two hours were a complete snore-fest. It's a long film at the best of times, but when the action doesn't start picking up until after the two hour mark, time becomes a real problem. The drama only actually starts picking up as South Africa begin approaching the World Cup final, and like I've said before, all the action is rugby-based. I'll admit though, I really did enjoy the last half hour. The game footage really picked up pace and I found myself watching the match as if it was a real game. The only problem for me was that I knew the outcome, down to the drop-goal that secures the match. This is what the whole film hangs on, and when creating a historical drama such as this, you really need something else to build suspense other than the factual events themselves. I'm still really undecided about this one to be honest. I loved taking a trip down memory lane, seeing familiar faces like Pienaar, Williams, Stransky and Lomu, but Freeman's performance and the first two thirds of the film really hold it back. Obviously it's very Hollywood and over-produced (what else would you expect with Eastwood at the helm?), but I can't really use that as the overriding basis for criticism. That said, try not to cringe too much when the song Colorblind is played over a scene of Mandela majestically arriving at the Springboks' training ground by helicopter. All in all, go and see it if you enjoy rugby and don't mind a big-budget Hollywood cheese-fest. If you're after a realistic and inspiration tale of political struggle, maybe give this one a miss. 5/10 Steve0
Kevin Smith's 'Cop Out' trailer
What was at one point known as 'A Couple of Dicks', the MPAA seemed to have a problem with this, so now it's simply known as 'Cop Out'. How lovely. Behold, the trailer.Looks so very different from Smith's previous works, it actually slightly upsets me. That's not to say this won't be an exceptional film. I suppose I mean that Smith has most definitely excelled himself, and obviously has moved onto more high-profile films. He's not a sell-out. He's a badass. Kazed.
