Posts Tagged 'imdb'

Wick-Quoting #50: Rise of the Planet of the Apes

“Stupid monkey! He’ll learn who’s boss soon enough.”

=======================================================

Rise of the Planet of the Apes opened this past weekend with relatively positive reviews from many critics and sources, successfully nabbing a “Fresh” 81% rating from Rotten Tomatoes and a solid 8.0 from IMDb.  It is clear that this film was a highly anticipated prequel to the famous Planet of the Apes franchise, and for the few who are not familiar with the franchise, the Rise was a curious introduction to the hairy apocalyptic universe.  However, that is all the acclamation this film deserves.

Franco and Pinto

The Rise does contain some well known talent, such as James Franco who plays the emotionally driven scientist, Will, and John Lithgow, who plays Will’s father, Charles, who suffers from Alzheimer’s disease.  Other familiar talents include Freida Pinto, best known for her role in Slumdog Millionaire, Tom Felton who played Draco Malfoy in the Harry Potter film series, and Andy Serkis who is popular for his role as the creature Gollum in The Lord of the Rings film trilogy.  This mixture of cast mates, including Brian Cox and Tom Felton, does achieve some fine moments on film, and the digital manipulation of Andy Serkis to create the ape, Caesar, is quite remarkable, but other than that, the film has little to offer.

Caesar did something bad

Due to the fact that the Rise is a prequel, we know what ultimately happens before we even take our seats in the theater, so we are just waiting to see how it happens, similarly to how Anakin Skywalker becomes Darth Vader in Star Wars: Episode III.  Therefore, it is the journey that is supposed to fully entertain, not the outcome.  But in this case, the Rise does not live up to its epic outcome.  The desperate Cal grad (Go Bears!…)  attempts to develop a cure for Alzheimer’s disease to save his father, while his boss Steven Jacobs, played by David Oyelowo, takes advantage of the potentially, very profitable drug, which leads to the demise of humans and the rise of the apes.  In addition, a lot of the screen time is taken up by the apes’ interactions with each other, which is necessary for the plot, but very boring to watch.  If I wanted to see CGI on CGI action I would have bought a ticket to see The Smurfs instead.

Those aren't real monkeys?!

Despite my critiques on the predictability of the plot and the tiresome grunting of the apes, the Rise did well in the box office results coming in first for the weekend and grossing $78 million worldwide.  Due to this relative success, there are rumors of a possible (and unnecessary) sequel.  A movie depicting the mass extinction of the human race due to a deadly virus is hardly a film I plan to waste any of my time on.  Plus, it looks like they have already made this film.  It’s called Contagion.  Go see it on September 9th if you really have nothing else to do.

6.0

Quoted by Ander

MWP: 7.0

New Site: http://www.mrwickedproductions.com/wickquoting/?p=232

Wick-Quoting #32: How to Train Your Dragon

“You, sir, are playing a dangerous game! Keeping this much raw viking-ness contained! There will be consequences!”

=======================================================

As mentioned in a previous post, animated movies for the past few years have all been pretty much the same thing: constantly regurgitating the same stories again and again.  However, How to Train Your Dragon (which will be referred to as HtTYD hence forth) is considered to be a Dratini amongst the plentiful Magikarp.  This is, of course, according to many ratings from different sources, including IMDb, which gave HtTYD an 8.2 (which is pretty high for IMDb).  Taking this into consideration, along with the good word from many movie goers, I was stoked to receive HtTYD in the mail from Netflix.  However, HtTYD has been one of the greater disappointments for me.  This only goes to show that you can’t trust reviews (other than mine, of course).

Don't let that cutie deceive you..

During the first 15 minutes of the movie, my eyes were wide open, and I was expecting to be thoroughly entertained for the next hour and a half.  The opening scene of different types of dragons attacking the village with the vikings fighting back is a unique clip to see.  The idea of having so many types of dragons reminded me of Pokemon, which left me with a nostalgic feeling.  But once the movie started to focus all its attention on its main character, Hiccup, I started to lose interest.  For starters, Hiccup is whiny, weak, and has a very annoying voice, sort of like the “protagonist” of Scott Pilgrim vs. The World (notice the quotes).  I found it difficult to side with such an uninteresting and bony character.

The other side characters are just sort of... there

Speaking of uninteresting characters, the side characters, which includes the other teenage vikings (which I forgot the names to), don’t have a great deal of character development at all in the film.  Astrid, the main female teenager, is the only one who really shows a complete 180 in personality, which is quite disappointing.  In the beginning, she hates Hiccup and dragons, but just after one ride on Hiccup’s dragon, Toothless, she automatically turns into Hiccup’s left hand bitch.  The change is quite unconvincing and does little to add Astrid as a strong, female character.  Hiccup should have just said, “One ride, and instead of hating me, you’re going to want to have my babies!”

They should fish for more unique plots

I don’t want to ruin the story, but let’s just say that Hiccup starts off as a loser and ends up as a hero in the end.  There is nothing creative or unique of how the story gets to point B.  But interestingly enough, despite my disappointment with the film, HtTYD has almost made almost 500 million worldwide and has very high ratings throughout the http://www.  Here’s the bottom line, besides having vikings and dragons, the movie really has nothing new to offer.  I guess watching it in 3D at the theaters did wonders to its quality, similar to Avatar.  Oh, Avatar

7.2

Quoted by MWP

Sawazz: 7.6

Wick-Quoting #12: Killers (2010)

Killers… what does that mean?  Exactly what can be learned about the film from that title?  People kill other people.  I guess that’s pretty much it.  Just like every other action movie.  So besides the vague title, what does Killers have to offer?  Frankly, nothing new.  Now, that’s not to say it’s a bad movie where you’ll find yourself taking a snooze in your seat.  It’s just probably something you won’t bother to see again (and perhaps something you shouldn’t see in the first place).

I spy, with my little eye..

Ex-spy, Spencer (Ashton Kutcher),  meets an ordinary girl, Jen (Katherine Heigl), and live together with a normal life in the suburbs.  Everything is great, until people they know turn out to be killers, trying to take Spencer down for a $20 million reward.  Heigl, known for her typical roles in films such as The Ugly Truth and 27 Dresses tilts the film to be more of a chick flick than a pure action film.  And that’s one of the main problems with this film – it’s too much of a mix of different styles and tones.  It’s like Picasso making something look realistic.  At one moment in the film, the couple is buying a pregnancy test and bickering like a married couple that they are.  At another moment, they are easily shooting bullets right into their neighbors’ skulls.  It’s difficult to settle into one mood while watching.  And considering that keeping audiences on their toes is what action films should do, Killers does so by constantly changing its tone.  Films should be consistent in tone.  A serious film should be serious (There Will Be Blood).  A mature film should be mature (Brokeback Mountain).  And a funny film should be funny (The Hangover).  All the way til the end!!

How many people at this party are going to die?

I had the opportunity to read the original script by Bob DeRosa before it was edited to reflect more of what the final product displays.   It has a solid tone and is more centered on Spencer rather than Jen.  And I believe that centering on the action man and making the story more serious would’ve been a better approach.  The film would’ve been a lot less confusing in the feeling you get (not talking about the plot), and in my opinion, more entertaining.  Although a plus for focusing on Jen is that it allows for a couple of awkward, funny moments.  Killers is “cute” at times.  Perhaps to the point of causing goosebumps.

Arguments, Children, and "Happiness." Pick two.

Considering that Killers is a 4-quadrant picture (it appeals to all four different groups – men under 25, men over 25, women under 25, and women over 25) it should be doing ok money wise.  It has action, a bit of romance (just look at the pink in the movie poster), and older stars (Tom Selleck and Catherine O’Hara) who play as Jen’s parents.  It’s a bit of a surprise to see the ratings the film is receiving when you consider the film’s quality only.  It’s not that bad of a film to receive only 3/10 stars on imdb.  Now that’s a bit harsh.  According to critics, it has worse ratings than Twilight, which is a slap in the face.  I guess that’s what happens when you piss off critics.  Therefore, you should never listen to paid film critics when deciding what to watch.  They’re only in it for the money after all.

Kutcher is a cool guy

It’s a fun film, but not something you should necessarily pay to see.

4.7


Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 3 other followers

mrwickedprod

Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.

Blog Stats

  • 53,176 hits