Change Your Image
stimpy_tr
According to many movies I have seen so far, there are great ones and terrible ones as there are great actings and terrible actings. Here is a list of some of my favorite actors:
1. Anthony Quinn, Roberto Benigni
2. Donald O'Connor
3. Kirk Douglas, Tony Curtis
4. James Stewart
5. Burt Lancaster
6. Humphrey Bogart
There many other great names like Yul Brynner, Charlton Heston, Steve McQueen of whom the movies I have yet to watch before placing in the list.
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Lord of the Flies (1990)
Review of 1990 adaptation
The 1990 adaptation of Lord of the Flies has a rewritten screenplay that is not so loyal to the book and includes some updated content. It deviates from the book in many places; such that there is a glowstick, no parachutist but a surviving captain. There are also helicopters and children calling each other "colonel". Some violent scenes are depicted unlike the 1963 adaptation. Unfortunately, that was also disappointing.
I don't understand why anybody would want to modify the script of a film that is based on a famous book. All in all, the 1990 version is watchable but fails to meet my expectations. I hope they make another one that is totally loyal to the book.
Lord of the Flies (1963)
Review of 1963 adaptation
First, unlike the general opinion, I don't find the book outstanding. It is very interesting but has many unrealistic parts as in every fiction book. Second, as for 1963 film adaptation, I can say I was dissappointed so much. The acting is so poor, character development does not exist. Special effects are non-existent. Many crucial details are omitted in the script. Some dialogues are trimmed and/or replaced with silent scenes. Those silent scenes become annoying after some time.
Violent scenes, which are the most striking parts of the book, are all excluded. The film provides merely a superficial abstract of the book.
Germinal (1993)
Nice adaptation
Having just finished the book and watched the previous 1913 and 1963 feature films, I can say that this is the best film adaptation of Germinal so far. The deviations from the book is much less than the other two. There were missing parts for sure, such as the adventures of Jeanlin, murder of the soldier, meeting of the miners in the forest. Unlike the previous two films, most of the explicit scenes are included.
There are some minor differences also. I waited a long time to see the fate of Zacharie through the ending. In the film, after he dies of gas explosion, his corpse is taken out in one piece; however, in the novel his head is blown away. One other difference is that Etienne and Catherine's days after the mine collapse is much more dreadful than the film; unfortunately, none of the films can depict their agony sufficiently.
Technically, among the cast, both Gérard Depardieu and Jean-Roger Milo are very successful as Maheu and Chaval. However, the biggest drawback is Renaud (as Etienne). In the book, Etienne is more aggressive and shows vicious animal instincts at times. In the film, this is softened.
Photography is generally captivating. However, I found some scenes extremely dark. They could have created the same gloominess with some more effort on make-up and costumes.
Overall, this is the most accurate feature film adaptation of Germinal ever made. Although it is not perfect, it is very pleasant to watch.
Germinal (1913)
Review on Accuracy of the Film
Having just finished the book, I would like the review the accuracy of this film.
1. In the book, Etienne and Chaval are two young men around 18-22 years of age. In the film, they look 50. Etienne is almost the same age as Maheu. All three look similar, hence I had difficulty distinguishing them. This was annoying.
2. Many characters like Jeanlin, Bébert, Lydie and La Mouquette and their stories are not depicted in the film.
3. In the book, after the pay cut is heard, miners still continue to work and the strike is triggered after an accident. In the film, no accident takes place and strike begins as soon as the pay cut is heard.
4. In the film, Etienne and Chaval's fight with the knife is portrayed very early and takes place in the street. However, in the book, the fight takes place in Rasseneur's bar.
5. In the book, Souvarin goes down the mine for sabotage the day before the miners resume work and gets out without being harmed. In the film, he goes down the mine at the same time as the miners and is struck by rushing water and falls down the pit. This was the most obvious deviation from the book.
6. The scene where Cécile is strangled by Bonnemort through the ending does not appear in the film.
7. The tragedy of Etienne and Catherine after the mine collapse is much more dreadful than is portrayed in the film.
8. The explicit parts like how they bathe and sleep are not depicted. The brutal killing scene of the shopowner and the following torture are not depicted at all.
These are the main points I could figure out. It is quite a long film for its time. Depicting everything in the book might require twice longer runtime. Still, it is a very nice adaptation and presents a delightful watch.
La boum (1980)
An Amazing French Classic
This is a movie about the romantic relationships of people from different ages. There are lots of elements of love and affection but at the same time, there are deceiving, cheating and lies. The characters and relationships are often ridiculized and this is what makes this movie special. My only criticism would be that the scene transitions are a little too sharp. That was probably made due to the comedic nature of the movie.
Young Sophie Marceau performs very well and doesn't fall behind adults when it comes to juggling boys. Especially her last-minute goal is impressive. Finally, the movie is blended with great songs of Vladimir Cosma; especially, Reality is astounding.
Blade: Trinity (2004)
What a mess!
Unfortunately, this is a terrible ending to the legendary Blade series. I think it couldn't have been made any worse. The story is a mess, characters are all underdeveloped. I didn't understand the breed of Blade's companions until the end of the film. They are made as strong as Blade which is a horrible mistake to do. Creating multiple superheroes gave way to a completely different genre from previous films.
Overall, the film consists of inept editing of unrelated scenes. The silliest of all is the final boss. On seeing Blade for the first time, he takes to his heels. The rest is predictable.
Underworld: Blood Wars (2016)
Coup de grâce
This is thankfully the final movie of the tormenting Underworld series. I never liked the entire series due to its unnecessarily dark scenes, lacking character development, conflicting stories, plot holes and childish plot twists. All these elements augmented in the last two movies creating a never-ending ordeal.
I literally prayed for the death of Selene and her boyfriends, but no way, they kept resurrecting again and again. On the other hand, 1000-year-old vampire kings got killed too easily. The special bullets with UV lights and silvers didn't exist in the last films or maybe they were ineffective. Selene and her boyfriends turned into immortal superheroes. It felt like watching Superman fight a bunch of street dogs. The only positive thing about this forgettable movie is the 90-minute runtime. I can't thank the producers enough.
Oppenheimer (2023)
Self-conflicting and futile
The biopic of Oppenheimer, the inventor of atomic bomb, is depicted in a weird fashion. The movie starts from his early career days at university and follows his transfer to the Manhattan Project. The movie is too long and made bitty with a non-linear narrative which I found completely unnecessary. The viewer is usually distracted with scenes from the future showing his trial against some people. Those distractions are too long and very annoying. There are too many characters and they are all underdeveloped. I didn't understand what the point is in deliberately confusing the viewer.
Also it is not possible to understand the viewpoint of the filmmakers. Are they heroizing or disparaging Oppenheimer for developing an atomic bomb? I think they are undecided and this is why they created such a mess. Last but not least, trying to depict Oppenheimer as having a bad conscience is utterly ridiculous.
Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)
Full of Overt and Subtle Messages
What was once a child's favorite film was re-analyzed many years later and led to a disappointment. As a child he considered it to be one of the most thrilling adventure movies. But today he realized that it was essentially based on filmmakers' grudge against Nazis. The film is unfortunately overwhelmed with this grudge. While Indy and his friends are invincible, the German soldiers get killed in most brutal ways. The ending is the funniest of all. Holy jewish spirits coming down from the heavens annihilate Nazis and take the revenge of the holocaust.
Otherwise, the film has a beautiful score and numerous memorable scenes, like the drinking contest of Marion, Indy's encounter with the swordsman and the room with snakes. It is still watchable but didn't age very well.
25th Hour (2002)
Great psychological drama
In this movie, a great psychological drama is depicted by an evidently talented crew. The movie is based on the friendship of three unique characters. The lead character Monty is a drug dealer, Frank is a Wall-Street broker and Jacob is a high school teacher. In real life it is hard to imagine these distinct characters being friends but they have a long-standing friendship from their childhood and they care about each other. Character development of each one is meticulously done with psychological subtexts. They all show great performances. Supporting cast is also very good. The movie has a regular pace with no intention to hurry and the suspense gradually increases through the ending. Great tunes accompany most scenes and the final dream sequence is like a last-minute goal. Overall, the movie is watchable multiple times.
Idi i smotri (1985)
Extreme Absurdity!
This is one of the rare films that I couldn't stand watching until the end. I tried so hard and endured about 90 minutes and that is more than enough to write a review. This is what I get:
The director and actors are amateurs. There is no plot and no script. It looks as if some people found a camera and haphazardly starting shooting a film. At the beginning, a young boy starts digging the sand and finds a rifle. Then, some soldiers come to his house and enlist him in the army. When marching with other soldiers in the forest, suddenly the boy finds himself all alone and runs into a girl that appears out of nowhere. At this point, extreme absurdity takes over and the plot never recovers. I thought this was a fantasy film, but no, people take it very seriously and consider it to be one of the best war movies. Are you kidding me? There is nothing interesting about it. There are no direct or subtle messages to get from it. It is just a plotless junk.
Luther: The Fallen Sun (2023)
Ultra-contrived nonsensical waste!
Imagine a man trapped in car that sinks 10 meters below an icy lake and instead of getting out, he keeps fighting with another man in the car, grabs his cell phone which is still working, opens an application that he never used before, fiddles with it -by the way the other guy is already frozen to death- and in the next scene he is in an ambulance, safe and sound. If these make sense to you, then the film is just fit for you.
Technically, character development is terrible. I think they assume that viewers have seen the series and are already familiar with the characters and past events. So they didn't bother about that. But they are wrong. A series is a series and a film is a film. A series can NOT be a prerequisite to understand a standalone film. On the other hand, the ultra-contrived plot drives you mad.
Oldeuboi (2003)
One heavy junk!
I don't understand what is so speacial about this movie. It delivers the cheesy message of 'eye for an eye'. Unfortunately, that's all about it and nothing else is interesting. Acting is terrible and the humour is not funny at all. You cannot insert comedy into a tragedy. That vain effort becomes irritating after some point. Scenes are too long and boring. There is nothing rational about the subject matter and the characters are not relatable.
With a little hope, I watched the 2013 remake. For me, character development and storytelling are slightly better but when it comes to rationality and plot holes, it is equally bad.
Good luck to those who are drifted by the wind! I'll pass.
Escape from Pretoria (2020)
Worth watching
This is an interesting prison movie about 1970s of South Africa. A racist regime prevails in South Africa and some white activists protesting the government get arrested and sent to Pretoria prison. They organize their escape plan by replicating keys. As mentioned in the end, it is not completely loyal to the original story, and unfortunately, was overly dramatized. It has cliché scenes and acting is mediocre.
What I liked most is, it pays tribute to two great prison movies, namely, A Man Escaped (1952) with the same ending song and Le Trou (1960) with the scene in which prisoners hit persistently on the door frame with a screwdriver. Even if it is not a masterpiece, it keeps you on the edge of the seat until the end.
El hoyo (2019)
Good idea, bad execution...
I feel obligated to write a review for this one after seeing all those praising comments. They laid it on thick because they thought this was the best movie ever filmed in the history of cinema and it gave outstanding messages that have never been given in any other movie. However, none of them seem to understand the ending. I keep laughing while writing these.
This is what I get from the movie. It starts with a nice premise with some people incarcerated in a vertical prison with limited food. Leaving technical faults aside as in a Sci-Fi movie, there are lots of plot holes and issues with the lead character. I wonder what moral messages are we supposed to get from a serial killer and corpse-eater. Turning into those is understandable from the course of events, but trying to deliver moral messages, that is a vain effort. As for the ending, it is utterly meaningless.
American History X (1998)
Psychoanalysis of extremism
This one is close to an exploitation movie where violence and foul language are generously used. There are some scenes that are really disturbing and not suitable for those under 18. I think it is a correct movie to depict all the horrid sides of extremism. It has been and will be a problem of all countries in the world. The essence of extremism lies in the lack of self-confidence and proper education which should be partly constructed in the family and partly at school. I also believe some people are more inclined to brainwashing from birth.
In this movie, the exremism is demonstrated in the form of racism but it could have also been some sort of faith-based group. The only way to keep away from such groups is to develop yourself and question everything. In this movie, Derek learned it from the hard way. My criticism about the movie is that it is not that easy to quit such an extremist group after all those years. Derek challenges the boss in the middle of a huge skinhead party and throws punches at his face. Normally, he must have got killed right there. Instead, he should have talked the boss personally much before and try to move elsewhere with all his family. Another thing is, his freaky girlfriend turns against him too quickly. He must have guessed that from her toxic personality and terminated his relationship much before the party.
On the upside, among the supporting cast, Avery Brooks and Guy Torry perform excellent. Overall, the movie gives good messages.
Twelve Monkeys (1995)
Don't fool yourselves!
I remember watching this movie in cinema many years ago and didn't like it so much then. And today, more than 20 years later I saw it again and my opinion strangely did NOT change a bit. There are lots of problems with it, too many plot holes and too many twists to the story.
Storytelling is so rushed and faulty that you know they are trying to cover up the unlimited plot holes emerging from the time paradox. You may not derive a message from such a mess. That who derives one is fooling themself. The fact that Bruce Willis and Brad Pitt play in it doesn't make it perfect. There is nothing to think on.
Dead Man Walking (1995)
Funny religious propaganda
I had difficulty understanding the subject of this movie until the last part. A nun tries so hard to communicate with a death row inmate from whom she received a letter. A confusion is created in viewers' mind as to what message the movie is trying to deliver. At first I thought it was about prejudice and false accusations against an innocent man. But I was wrong. It turned out to be a christian propaganda and it comes pretty funny if you are not much of a religious person.
From a technical point of view, the performance of Susan Sarandon is terrible. Her character is unrelatable and completely lacks the psychology of a nun. I was not very positive for Sean Penn either until the last quarter of the movie where he shows a scintillating performance. However, the subject matter didn't hold my interest much.
The Green Mile (1999)
Good but not to be exaggerated
This movie is based on a purely fictional story. So we cannot seek much rationality in it. It is about the prison days of a gifted black man who is falsely accused of killing two girls and waiting in death row. The prejudice against black people is very well reflected.
Among the cast, Michael Clarke Duncan performs excellent in the movie. I also liked the acting of Sam Rockwell (as Wild Bill) and Michael Jeter (as Delacroix). Tom Hanks (as Paul) performs merely average compared to his other roles. His character is so dull. They should have included some more psychological subtext.
Ending is not pleasant either, that is, overwhelmed with mawkishness. Paul says that he was appointed elsewhere right after the execution of John Coffey and I wonder why not before. For me, what makes this movie special is the photography. Close-up shots and lighting are very nicely used. Overall, it is an interesting watch but somewhat overrated.
La vita è bella (1997)
A unique WWII movie
This one is an interesting WWII prison movie for several aspects. First, it has an unusual somewhat surreal narrative. Second, Roberto Benigni performs outstanding in the movie. The movie consists of two distinct parts. In the first part, it depicts a romantic relationship between a lighthearted gabbler named Guido (Roberto Benigni) and a teacher (Nicoletta Braschi) in Italy of 1939. Here, the movie is slow-paced giving the viewer almost no clue about what will become of the lead characters. However, in the second part, the plot makes a 180-degree turn. A few years after their marriage, Nazi soldiers capture the family and take them to a concentration camp. Guido makes every effort to make his son feel comfortable in the camp.
The plot is very original. There is a very abrupt transition from romantic-comedy to drama. Roberto Benigni's performance is outstanding. I believe most actors could have failed to overcome this role. Overall, the movie depicts the Nazi cruelty in a unique way.
The Shawshank Redemption (1994)
Analyzing 10 points
Let me analyze why people keep giving 10 points to this film. I think most of them were bedazzled by its top position on IMDB and cannot make an independent judgement. They pick it as their best film, because millions of people cannot be wrong. Most of them were drifted by the wind; some took the bull run as in a crypto market, and some were just railroaded. But I don't blame them. I was impressed by this film so much when I first watched it on TV many years ago. I was around 18 years old back then. It was one of my favorite films and IMDB didn't exist back then.
Through years, I have viewed and reviewed many films. One can seek many criteria when evaluating a film, but for me, rationality and consistency have become important criteria. And in this film, there are some scenes that came to me quite irrational, such as the scene in which convicts drink beer on the rooftop, or the one with Andy playing Mozart from speakers. Previously, a convict was beaten to death just for crying in his cell on his first day in prison. Moreover, the plot is highly contrived and this manifests itself in the character of Andy. He was made too stoic that he seems to foresee the outcome of everything. Such heroic characters appeal more to children. Maybe I am too old to buy that. His makeup is not consistent either. He gets old and then young again.
On the upside, Morgan Freeman's performance is outstanding. He portrays a real convict and delivers a delightful narration. Moreover, the film has an intense wish fulfillment in the ending. Overall, I can say that this is a nice film but not the best.
The Fugitive (1993)
Example acting
This movie demonstrates how acting is important in movies. The performances of Harrison Ford and Tommy Lee Jones are spectacular. They really live the related characters to the depth. Supporting cast is also nice. Storyline is based on the series with the same name from 1963. Dr. Richard Kimble (played by Ford), a renowned doctor, tries to chase the man who killed his wife and clear his name before the police catches up with him. The movie is a little fast paced and intrigues get deeper towards the ending. There are nice flashbacks introduced at times giving clues about the killer. The movie is still compelling after many years.
Lock Up (1989)
A classic from Sly
This movie has become a classic of the 80s. The thing is, although the story is highly fictional, characters are all unique and relatable. There are great names in the cast, such as, besides Sly, Donald Sutherland, John Amos, Frank McRae and Jordan Lund. Acting of all is very well. The subject matter is inherently masculine and the story has a brutal content. It was a favorite movie of ours in our teenage years together with those of Arnold Schwarzenegger. Today, watching this movie brought on nostalgia for me. In addition to these, there is nice music in the background in most of the scenes. It is composed by Bill Conti who also worked in Rocky series and created memorable tunes.
Sobibor (2018)
Total Annihilation
In the title, I am not talking about what was done to Jews, but rather, what was done to the original movie Escape from Sobibor (1987). In this one, there is no story development, nor is there a character development. There are no lead actors in the first place.
The movie uses every cliché about Nazi soldiers and augment those in order to add to overdramatization. Their actions lack credibility completely. They are portrayed as clowns in a circus. I counted minutes till the ending not because of suspense, but because of the unbearable mockery the director had created. I had to check my pulse several times. What an annihilation!
Escape from Sobibor (1987)
Vastly Underrated
Frankly, I underestimated this one as it was a TV movie and had a low rating. But I was wrong. Both the plot and storytelling hold up pretty well. The movie has an average pacing all through. It feels like a very engrossing drama series that you don't want it to end. Acting is very natural and the characters are relatable. Alan Arkin and Rutger Hauer perform a good job here. What I liked most is that no part of the movie feels like overdramatization. Some subplots are very interesting, such as, whether true or not, welcoming of new arrivals at the train station. Finally, I think this is one of the greatest WW2 escape movies and it is vastly underrated.