Posts Tagged 'star wars'

Wick-Quoting #47: X-Men: First Class

“Let’s just say I’m Frankenstein’s monster. I’m looking for my creator.”

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

I must say, the trailer for X-Men: First Class was “eh” and my attitude towards it was “eh.”  But it is spectacular; even if you are not into Marvel comics, it will still entertain.  Why is X-Men: First Class so much better than the recent superhero movies that are coming out nowadays?  It is because the movie focuses a lot more on character development along with its flashy graphics and story development.

The first group of X-Men

The film is a prequel to the X-Men trilogy, centering on the early days of Magneto (Michael Fassbender) and Professor Xavier (James McAvoy).  Both characters interact with each other very well, one being more funny while the other more bad ass. Who knew Professor Xavier had a sense of humor?  And there were a couple of interesting cameos, including Hugh Jackman returning as Wolverine.

He has hair!

The main thing I don’t like about the movie is Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence) – she is very annoying as a character.  She is Professor X’s little (adopted) sister, yet she has romantic feelings for him?  After he rejects her, she moves on to another guy, then after that, she sides with the group who attacked her teammates?  I guess her personality matches with her ability – a person with multiple faces.

Call me Magneto

The movie reminds me quite a lot of Star Wars: Episode III, (when Anakin turns into Darth Vader) cause you know what happens to the characters (who ends up on which side) but you don’t know how it all happens.  Like Star Wars: Episode III, X-Men: First Class can be considered a nice success, making over $320 million so far.  However, unlike Episode III, First Class is a movie worth watching.

8.3

Quoted by MWP

New Site: http://www.mrwickedproductions.com/wickquoting/?p=207

Advertisements

Wick-Quoting #36: Black Swan

“I just want to be perfect.”

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

Black Swan is pretty much close to perfect.  The director, Darren Aronofsky, seems to enjoy making films with extremely low budgets.  His previous film before Black Swan was The Wrestler, which only had a production budget of 6 million.  However, the difference between Black Swan and The Wrestler is the quality.  Black Swan beats The Wrestler in every way.  Not only did Black Swan make more than 6 times more money than The Wrestler (approximately 295 million worldwide), but it also contains well-liked stars such as Natalie Portman and Mila Kunis.  The interaction between the two actors creates a thrilling performance.

BFF?

Natalie Portman displayed what she is capable of in Black Swan, with her sweet girl image combined with a more terrifying personality.  You could say that the film allowed her to express herself to higher levels than her times in Star Wars.  Mila Kunis also fitted very well with her role as the bad girl.  It was interesting to see these two actresses come together and make sparks fly.

Here is a reason why the film was so popular

While this film isn’t necessarily a horror movie, it still contains many elements of one, including frightening images and unnatural occurrences.  Many times, I felt the film to be too much to look at, with all the creepy images, but I was compelled to stay, because I still wanted to be engaged with what was happening and what was going to happen.  You could say that the film was constantly pulling me back in.

Kind of creepy

Black Swan is most definitely in 2010’s top films of the year, alongside True Grit and Toy Story 3.

9.2

Quoted by MWP

Sawazz: 9.2

Check out my new site: http://www.mrwickedproductions.com/wickquoting/?p=93

Double-Quoting #26-27: The Godfather & The Godfather Part II

“Fredo, you’re my older brother, and I love you.  But don’t ever take sides with anyone against the Family again.  Ever.”

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

While The Godfather (1972) and The Godfather Part II (1974) are both films from the same franchise, there is a clear difference between the two, in both quality and character development (there may obviously be a connection between the two).  Even though The Godfather Part II is longer by 25 mins (The Godfather is 2 hr & 55 mins while The Godfather Part II is 3 hr & 20 mins) The Godfather seems to include so much more characters, story, excitement, and twists than its sequel.

Marlon Brando as "The Godfather"

One of the main, apparent reason as to why The Godfather is at a higher caliber than TG2 (The Godfather Part II) is because of Marlon Brando’s performance as “The Godfather.”  He created a unique character who appears gentle and reasonable, yet commands respect from not only his family, but from his enemies as well.  “The Godfather,” also known as Don Vito Corleone, has an unforgettable way of speech, which makes you wish he was your grandfather.  Through Vito Corleone, the sons can be easily compared, bringing out their unique and different personalities.

... and they never come back

Even though The Godfather can be very predictable at times, such as when certain characters will die, it still has a solid foundation of character development.  At first, it may seem as though Vito Corleone is the main character of the story, but later, it becomes very clear that the film revolves around the life of the youngest son, Michael Corleone, played by Al Pacino.  This is done in a similar fashion as in Star Wars, where the whole series revolves around Anakin Skywalker instead of the teacher, Obi-Won Kenobi.  As events pass by, including the attempted assassination of his father, Michael can be seen to change as a character, from an unreliable, indifferent son, to a quick thinking, criminal mastermind.  Our attachment to Michael at the beginning, due to his life as a normal person, grants us a ride through a legacy of killing for respect.  While Michael does not become exactly like his father, he obtains qualities as a mob king which makes him awesome in his own way.  This includes his cold, calculating mind, his smooth hair, and his icy stare.

He looks like he was made for the part

The Godfather has it all, love, betrayal, murder, payback, and cool lines.  What TG2 lacks is not one of the qualities mentioned in the previous sentence, but the character development of  the main character in both films. In The Godfather, Michael’s love life is shown, with him and Kay (Diane Keaton) going through much hardship to be together in the end.  Also, his rise of power is depicted, starting from his position as the youngest son, to the strongest mafia head in the country.  In TG2, Michael is already at his peak as the powerful mafia boss.  He could go no higher; in fact, he narrowly escapes losing everything by almost being held responsible for his crimes.  The movie contains no romance; he kicks Kay out after learning the truth behind the miscarriage.  TG2 is more focused on comparing the past to the present.  The film is literally made up of half flashback scenes, which mainly involve Vito Corleone’s younger days.  Most of the flashback scenes don’t do much for the overall film.  After just the first flashback, we get the idea – the business which Vito Corleone started back in the day is now falling apart.

The stare of death

TG2 follows a technique which many bad films adopt, which is the art of introducing random characters/story plots in order to keep the story moving.  The example I’m talking about here is when Michael brings in the older brother of Frank Pentangeli with him to court.  This character is some random character with assumed fame and respect and so happens has the ability to shut Frank up.  Now, I am not saying that TG2 is a terrible film; I am saying it is a terrible film compared to its prequel.  However, the film still holds up on its own with the returning cast including, Al Pacino, Robert Duvall, Diane Keaton, Talia Shire, and John Cazale.  Not to forget to mention, the musical background in both is riveting.

My favorite scene in Part II

The difference of both films can be told in numbers.  The Godfather had a production budget of only 6.5 million but raked in a total of 245 million, while TG2 had a production budget of 13 million but only scored 193 million (the word “only” is used to emphasis the comparison).  Even though these films are oldies, they are by far better than the majority of films being made nowadays.  The Godfather series is turning up to be one of my favorite series.  Hopefully the third installment can live up to the first (not just the second).  I will find out soon enough.

The Godfather: 9.5

The Godfather Part II: 8.0

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

“If anything in this life is certain, if history has taught us anything, it is that you can kill anyone.”

My Rating System

So I’ve been getting (a lot of) emails on my rating system and what the numbers actually mean.  This post will help you all understand what movies you should and shouldn’t be watching based on the final numbers.

10 – This movie is completely flawless.  Of course, a rating of 10 will probably never exist because nothing is truly perfect (especially if people are involved).

9 – One helluva good movie.  You cannot miss/skip watching a movie with a rating of 9 or above.  To do so would be the equivalent of watching the whole Twilight series.  Back-to-back.  With your parents.

8 – A really nice movie as well, but with some apparent flaws.  For example, one actor is completely off/terrible (Star Wars) or there is a lack of character development (Zombieland).  A rating of 8 means a trip to the theaters is still definitely worth it.

7 – Not the best but still satisfying.  Watching a movie with a rating of 7 would not be considered a “waste of time.”  A couple of examples include Iron Man 2, I, Robot, and The Princess and the Frog.

6 – You know that feeling you get after you watch the closing scene of a movie, and you just sit there (not in awe)?  That is the feeling of a 6, the kid running between the beach and the ocean.  Anything lower is not worth your time.

5 – You’ve just spent $10 to sit in one spot for about 2 hrs.  Congrats.

4 – You call this a movie?

3 – Imagine a world where M. Night Shyamalan is considered the best director of all time and chick flicks are considered highly engaging.  You are at number 3.

2 – **

1 – *

 

So there you have it.  Hopefully the rating system makes much more sense now.  Basically, don’t pay attention to anything under a rating of 6, and definitely watch movies that are above a rating of 8.

Wickquoting #1: Avatar

So, as everybody already realized, Avatar is a (can’t say cheap, after all, its budget was over 200 million) ripoff of stories like Pocahontas. Due to the predictable plot, it was difficult to feel any suspense or thrill throughout the film.  And because it lacked suspense, connections couldn’t really be made between the characters and audience.  Suspense causes people to worry for the character’s well being, allowing for audiences to have a more intimate experience with the film.  Seriously, the only thing I was worrying about while watching the movie was what people nowadays think of as a good film and, oh, if I left the oven on.

Upon realizing the obvious storyline (it only took about the first 15 mins of the film), I tried to focus on and enjoy the visual effects of Avatar.  Sure the graphics looks amazing and all, but this kind of visual look has already been done and will only get better as time goes on.  The visual quality of a film shouldn’t decide the film’s value/worth.  In fact, most of the famous films in history have a terrible, grainy quality to them, including The Man with the Moving Camera, The Graduate, and the original Star Wars.

If this is want people want nowadays, I fear for future cinema

What I really didn’t like about Avatar was it’s unoriginality.  I mean, sure it has blue people instead of Native Americans and the setting is in a different world instead than Earth, but those are just physical/outter changes; they don’t change the overall story at all.  It’s similar to how scriptwriters edit other scriptwriters’ works and just change the name of the characters and places just so they can change the bare minimum percentage of the script in order to claim the rights of the whole script.  Sure James Cameron is a great, successful director, but he def isn’t my favorite.  Many people seem to disagree with me, judging from the 2,105,500,000 gross revenue that Avatar brought in so far.  2 BILLION?!!  I guess you can still be extremely successful while being totally unoriginal.  What a world we live in.

5.6


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

Join 3 other followers

RSS MrWickedProductions

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS Wick-Quoting

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

mrwickedprod

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

Blog Stats

  • 53,554 hits