Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Ratings240
JaydoDre's rating
Reviews184
JaydoDre's rating
Just a short one, because there is not a lot to say about Moana 2.
There are two songs that woke me up from my sleep, Get Lost, with the vocals from Awhimai Fraser, and Dwayne Johnson's Can I get a Chee Hoo. Fraser does some amazing vocal gymnastics and her song is catchy. There is so much vocal power against the background of 70s instrumentation. Can I get a Chee Hoo features an energetic Dwayne Johnson rapping with a complicated backing track and the lyrics are pretty smart. These two songs make you realise how boring the rest of the music is. The preceding songs are all just generic Disney princess stuff, with some Polynesian flavour thrown in occasionally. This is why you shouldn't put so many songs in an animated film - they can't all be diamonds, so just put in the diamonds and leave the rest out.
Other than that, Moana 2 continues the trend from the first instalment of having breathtaking visuals but a bad story. The writing is very lazy, and the details make no sense. It gets worse the closer you get to the end. Look at the pretty colours and shut up.
Simea, Maoan's little sister, is extremely cute, well animated and voiced. Dwayne Johnson is very energetic as Maui. Where does this guy get so much energy, if he barely sleeps? Moana herself is...ok. I've experienced this type of female lead performance so many times in so many other animated films that it's hard to produce an opinion of any kind.
Moana 2 is another mindless beautiful animated movie.
There are two songs that woke me up from my sleep, Get Lost, with the vocals from Awhimai Fraser, and Dwayne Johnson's Can I get a Chee Hoo. Fraser does some amazing vocal gymnastics and her song is catchy. There is so much vocal power against the background of 70s instrumentation. Can I get a Chee Hoo features an energetic Dwayne Johnson rapping with a complicated backing track and the lyrics are pretty smart. These two songs make you realise how boring the rest of the music is. The preceding songs are all just generic Disney princess stuff, with some Polynesian flavour thrown in occasionally. This is why you shouldn't put so many songs in an animated film - they can't all be diamonds, so just put in the diamonds and leave the rest out.
Other than that, Moana 2 continues the trend from the first instalment of having breathtaking visuals but a bad story. The writing is very lazy, and the details make no sense. It gets worse the closer you get to the end. Look at the pretty colours and shut up.
Simea, Maoan's little sister, is extremely cute, well animated and voiced. Dwayne Johnson is very energetic as Maui. Where does this guy get so much energy, if he barely sleeps? Moana herself is...ok. I've experienced this type of female lead performance so many times in so many other animated films that it's hard to produce an opinion of any kind.
Moana 2 is another mindless beautiful animated movie.
Helpful•00
Cinema Paradiso leads us through the life of a man by the name of Salvatore and shows the role cinema played in his life and the lives of the inhabitants of the little Sicilian town of Giancaldo. We see the town's cultural and technological transformation through the decades after the war.
Some elements of the film work well, like the heartwarming portrayal of the friendship between Salvatore and his mentor Alfredo, and the depiction of local culture in post-war Italy. However, the film falters when it introduces the love story between Salvatore and Elena, a local girl. It is sappy and simplistic. At one point, our lovers are laying on the stones in the pouring rain as they kiss. It looks very romantic, until you realise that this would be extremely uncomfortable and makes no sense.
As the story returns to the present day, Salvatore goes back to Giancaldo and the love of his youth is, of course, still there. This is when the movie becomes overly sentimental and a bit boring, as it refuses to wind down yet struggles to find meaningful material. The film is almost 3 hours long, but feels far longer, because the shots are drawn-out and the pacing comes to a crawl, especially towards the end. Cinema Paradiso just refuses to finito when it should.
With the themes being what they are, the film will appeal to those interested in Sicilian post-war culture and specifically in the art of filmmaking (Giuseppe Tornatore's love for cinema is probably far greater than yours or mine). Without a strong connection to these themes, what remains is the relationships of Salvatore with his mentor and the love story with Elena, which may not be compelling enough to sustain interest.
The standout performance is Alfredo, played by Philippe Noiret. As for Salvatore himself, you can be the judge. A good chunk of the film is set during his childhood, where the role is given to the boy by the name of Salvatore Cascio and this kid was probably encouraged to overact. His delivery can be quite irritating but also endearing at times. The teenage Salvatore is alright, but his performance doesn't stand out.
The cinematography is warm and cozy, just like Italy itself. Ennio Morricone's score is a major contributor to the film's emotional weight and is recognizable, with its dramatic longing strings. The main theme lingers in the mind. Everything is a bit melodramatic, but that's Italy for you.
Cinema Paradiso is a nostalgic celebration of cinema mixed with a sentimental and simplistic celebration of love. If you like the idea of embedding yourself in the culture of the time and don't mind the simple love story, then this film makes for a rewarding experience, but if you are just an average movie goer expecting a compelling narrative, this film may bore you, particularly in its last act. There is apparently a shorter version of this film. While the critics tend to recommend the full version, the shorter version might provide a more concise and impactful experience.
Some elements of the film work well, like the heartwarming portrayal of the friendship between Salvatore and his mentor Alfredo, and the depiction of local culture in post-war Italy. However, the film falters when it introduces the love story between Salvatore and Elena, a local girl. It is sappy and simplistic. At one point, our lovers are laying on the stones in the pouring rain as they kiss. It looks very romantic, until you realise that this would be extremely uncomfortable and makes no sense.
As the story returns to the present day, Salvatore goes back to Giancaldo and the love of his youth is, of course, still there. This is when the movie becomes overly sentimental and a bit boring, as it refuses to wind down yet struggles to find meaningful material. The film is almost 3 hours long, but feels far longer, because the shots are drawn-out and the pacing comes to a crawl, especially towards the end. Cinema Paradiso just refuses to finito when it should.
With the themes being what they are, the film will appeal to those interested in Sicilian post-war culture and specifically in the art of filmmaking (Giuseppe Tornatore's love for cinema is probably far greater than yours or mine). Without a strong connection to these themes, what remains is the relationships of Salvatore with his mentor and the love story with Elena, which may not be compelling enough to sustain interest.
The standout performance is Alfredo, played by Philippe Noiret. As for Salvatore himself, you can be the judge. A good chunk of the film is set during his childhood, where the role is given to the boy by the name of Salvatore Cascio and this kid was probably encouraged to overact. His delivery can be quite irritating but also endearing at times. The teenage Salvatore is alright, but his performance doesn't stand out.
The cinematography is warm and cozy, just like Italy itself. Ennio Morricone's score is a major contributor to the film's emotional weight and is recognizable, with its dramatic longing strings. The main theme lingers in the mind. Everything is a bit melodramatic, but that's Italy for you.
Cinema Paradiso is a nostalgic celebration of cinema mixed with a sentimental and simplistic celebration of love. If you like the idea of embedding yourself in the culture of the time and don't mind the simple love story, then this film makes for a rewarding experience, but if you are just an average movie goer expecting a compelling narrative, this film may bore you, particularly in its last act. There is apparently a shorter version of this film. While the critics tend to recommend the full version, the shorter version might provide a more concise and impactful experience.
Helpful•10
I didn't get this movie the first time I saw it. I was impatient, watching it mostly for the purpose of being able to say that I watched it. And if you watch this movie like a "normal person", as if this movie was some modern gangster movie, you're going to find it to be what many others found it to be: boring. Moreover, out of the people who claim to love this movie, I strongly suspect that half of them claim it for the sake of not appearing to be uncultured.
However, what I realised is that this is not a gangster flick. It is an epic detective story, a whodunit, but set from the point of view of a criminal instead of a detective. And, as one of those types of stories, it is complex, with red herrings, twists and reveals. Not only that, but it is a tightly knit detective story that is almost 3.5 hours long. Moreover, as with Godfather I, this film takes its time with building its atmosphere and intrigue. When a scene creates awkwardness, the scene revels in that awkwardness for a little while. It drives the point home. Many scenes involve Michael Corleone just walking somewhere slowly. The camera lingers on the characters while they are sitting still. Some of these quiet scenes are tense. Others aren't.
And yet, in order to appreciate all the subtleties of the power play and the various story twists, you must pay attention. You must listen to every sentence of the conversations, every name, Michael Corleone's eyes movements, and the various political events. If you don't, you may miss an important plot point or two and the story will stop making sense later on. If you do pay attention, however, you will be greatly rewarded with a rich story and a deep character study.
Although the story is tight, I will point out a few issues. There is a point, at which Michael Corleone suddenly has a change of heart about something he had already decided earlier and whacks someone who is neither an enemy nor a threat. It is at this point that the story wants Michael Corleone to go full Darth Vader, and this complete descent into darkness feels a little excessive.
Then there is the key element of this film: the double storyline. Most of the events show the life of Michael Corleone, but flashbacks show the life of this father, Vito. The intention behind showing two different storylines is questionable. If the point was to show the difference between the two men, I am not sure that I saw it. Both men are greedy and ruthless. Both men are vindictive. Vito is a little better to his family than his son, but in Michael's defence, his family members appear to be out of control. It seems that, primarily through circumstances, one of them keeps gaining family, while the other keeps losing and alienating his family. The double storyline is most effective at creating an epic feel and showing off the cool scenery of two different time periods.
The acting is top notch. The epic feel is maintained thanks to the fact that you have so many characters making their own moves and all these characters are excellent in their own unique way. At this point Al Pacino could be very subtle in his acting, with only a single movement of the mouth saying a lot, but De Niro and Al Pacino are just the tip of the iceberg. Pentangeli played by Michael V. Gazzo is so expressive and has such an energetic presence that he almost steals the movie. Gastone Moschin created an unforgettable character in the eccentric white-clad gangster by the name of Fanucci. With any other person, I would've said that he is overacting, but I totally believed this guy was a real character from the time.
Godfather II is filled with memorable cinematographic gems. The recreation of the 20s New York is a sight to see and uses a different colo pallet to the present. The movie gets progressively darker as Michael Corleone descends into paranoia and isolation. The camera shots are up close and personal, with strong dramatic shadows on characters' faces.
In short, I would not call this film a great one or a bad one, but rather a movie for a specific audience in the right frame of mind. Although I enjoyed it on my secod viewig, I am not a fan of movies that make you work. I paid the price of admission and bought a bucket with popcorn. My side of the bargain ends there.
However, what I realised is that this is not a gangster flick. It is an epic detective story, a whodunit, but set from the point of view of a criminal instead of a detective. And, as one of those types of stories, it is complex, with red herrings, twists and reveals. Not only that, but it is a tightly knit detective story that is almost 3.5 hours long. Moreover, as with Godfather I, this film takes its time with building its atmosphere and intrigue. When a scene creates awkwardness, the scene revels in that awkwardness for a little while. It drives the point home. Many scenes involve Michael Corleone just walking somewhere slowly. The camera lingers on the characters while they are sitting still. Some of these quiet scenes are tense. Others aren't.
And yet, in order to appreciate all the subtleties of the power play and the various story twists, you must pay attention. You must listen to every sentence of the conversations, every name, Michael Corleone's eyes movements, and the various political events. If you don't, you may miss an important plot point or two and the story will stop making sense later on. If you do pay attention, however, you will be greatly rewarded with a rich story and a deep character study.
Although the story is tight, I will point out a few issues. There is a point, at which Michael Corleone suddenly has a change of heart about something he had already decided earlier and whacks someone who is neither an enemy nor a threat. It is at this point that the story wants Michael Corleone to go full Darth Vader, and this complete descent into darkness feels a little excessive.
Then there is the key element of this film: the double storyline. Most of the events show the life of Michael Corleone, but flashbacks show the life of this father, Vito. The intention behind showing two different storylines is questionable. If the point was to show the difference between the two men, I am not sure that I saw it. Both men are greedy and ruthless. Both men are vindictive. Vito is a little better to his family than his son, but in Michael's defence, his family members appear to be out of control. It seems that, primarily through circumstances, one of them keeps gaining family, while the other keeps losing and alienating his family. The double storyline is most effective at creating an epic feel and showing off the cool scenery of two different time periods.
The acting is top notch. The epic feel is maintained thanks to the fact that you have so many characters making their own moves and all these characters are excellent in their own unique way. At this point Al Pacino could be very subtle in his acting, with only a single movement of the mouth saying a lot, but De Niro and Al Pacino are just the tip of the iceberg. Pentangeli played by Michael V. Gazzo is so expressive and has such an energetic presence that he almost steals the movie. Gastone Moschin created an unforgettable character in the eccentric white-clad gangster by the name of Fanucci. With any other person, I would've said that he is overacting, but I totally believed this guy was a real character from the time.
Godfather II is filled with memorable cinematographic gems. The recreation of the 20s New York is a sight to see and uses a different colo pallet to the present. The movie gets progressively darker as Michael Corleone descends into paranoia and isolation. The camera shots are up close and personal, with strong dramatic shadows on characters' faces.
In short, I would not call this film a great one or a bad one, but rather a movie for a specific audience in the right frame of mind. Although I enjoyed it on my secod viewig, I am not a fan of movies that make you work. I paid the price of admission and bought a bucket with popcorn. My side of the bargain ends there.
Helpful•10