dan_slentz

Nearly always love Amy Adams work, but this is a rare one of hers that I really did NOT like. The boys who played her son were excellent in not looking like they were young actors, but totally natural (which made me wonder if they hid the camera or what they did to get such natural reactions from her son in the scenes.

The storyline is simply weird (at best), and editing is really "disjointed", jumping back and forth without a thread to carry the story. I'm disappointed I didn't like this movie. I thought the premise was interesting, but considering where it landed, I'd rather watch an old Werewolf Movie or other similar themed movies before watching this one again. I'd say the overall rating is very "generous" because Amy Adams is such a likeable actress.

From Reel Tunez, The Radio Show All About the Movies... I didn't expect a great story, and felt the follow-up to the original just couldn't live up to it (so I'd be disappointed), BUT, holy mackerel, what a fantastic movie! First, every single actor from the youngest to stars, and from the less seen characters to extras were ALL just incredible! I've never said that about a movie or actors, but this must be credited to directing and the producers and all the crew that dealt with casting and "wrangling". Really... They were THAT good. Then, let's look at production values. Simply BEAUTIFUL!! The cinematography and effects were excellent. I will say that the digital animation on the baboons and some of the other animals was "off" and really not fully convincing as you'd hope, but not to the point of serious distraction. Sets, costumes.. everything was just absolutely convincing! And then the story.. I don't want to give anything away, but I can say it made full sense, it followed the original movie, and it "fit perfect". I have to add that the opening credits had me thinking "this isn't going to be good".. because I felt that the "lean" on the original Gladiator was probably an attempt to create some sort of connection that wouldn't be there. Fortunately, I was wrong. I rate movies on a 1-10 scale (with half stars), and believe people "grade" far too high (as a movie you like shouldn't be rated a 10 "because you liked it".. because what are the classics like Gone with the Wind, Sound of Music, Star Wars, or Oliver if every other movie shares that 10 rating??) Anyhow, with that said, I scored this one very high with a 8 stars out of 10. See it on a big screen! See it in a beautiful theater with great sound, well-presented, laser projection in 4K. Pay to see it so the studios, actors, directors and writers get the benefit of their work.

Reel Tunez, The Radio Show All About the Movies.. Movie Review (7/21/24): "Twisters"

Not a bad movie, but not as good as the original (as is often the case). It's scoring higher reviews on IMDB than the original, but I sure don't see that. Unlike the original, the actors in Twisters aren't at the same level in status as the originals were.. and it's just my thought that they aren't nearly as good a cast as the original.

The story line was okay, but in some ways in really felt like more of a "remake". As opposed to the drive-in theater, this time a rodeo. Certainly one part of the movie was much different, and that was probably the part that I liked best (since it didn't feel like a "rerun" during that point.) I want to be careful about not giving away anything or any part of the plot, but would say that if you don't have great expectations, you might enjoy this better.

On the positive side, the quality of the production and effects were decent but really no better than any other modern disaster movie. Did think the audio was lacking (at least where I saw it). I'd expect better SOUNDING effects and sounds during the tornado sequences, but they weren't immersive or scary (though I did hear the "train sound" that are often attributed to tornados).

I think this is really the type of movie that needs to be seen on a big screen with BIG audio.. and that the story doesn't make it a great movie at all for watching on your 48" TV at home. Some movies are more about the visuals that the movie or storyline, and that's why this one is better in a theater.

On a 1-10 scale, I'd give it a 5.5. Anything over a 5 (for my ratings) is worth seeing, but this just barely made that cut.