Havgar
Joined Jun 2007
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges3
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews7
Havgar's rating
I decided to see this movie, in part, thanks the two very positive reviews that it had right here on IMDb. While I did see quite a few positive aspects of the movie, I was left feeling disappointed overall.
I won't discuss the plot at all here - you can get that from the IMDb page or the other reviews. I will, instead, look at what the film does well, and at what it does not do well.
What the film does well is create a very tense situation for our characters, where we spend a good deal of time on the edge of our seats. These characters have to navigate the very brutal world around them, trying to make ends meat. They are living in constant fear, they have no security, there are no social structures in place to help them (the kinds of social structures we take for granted in most first world countries). These aspects of the film are done very well.
Likewise done very well is the cinematography, where you will note the lack of excessive use of shaky cam or other annoying techniques. Finally, the acting is pretty solid overall, with a few exceptions.
The film does a few things quite poorly. While I wouldn't go so far as to say that it fails to create an engaging plot, the plot certainly leaves a lot to be desired. It seems as though it was glossed over rather than fully developed. Moreover, the writing is pretty poor throughout the movie. Some scenes play out laughably unrealistically, while others just leave too much up in the air.
Finally, I would mention that despite the fact that film is categorized as "action", you should not expect any real action scenes of any value.
I rate this movie 6 out of 10, and I don't recommend it for the average movie-goer, although those who have an inclination for one or more of the elements the film focuses around may find it enjoyable.
I won't discuss the plot at all here - you can get that from the IMDb page or the other reviews. I will, instead, look at what the film does well, and at what it does not do well.
What the film does well is create a very tense situation for our characters, where we spend a good deal of time on the edge of our seats. These characters have to navigate the very brutal world around them, trying to make ends meat. They are living in constant fear, they have no security, there are no social structures in place to help them (the kinds of social structures we take for granted in most first world countries). These aspects of the film are done very well.
Likewise done very well is the cinematography, where you will note the lack of excessive use of shaky cam or other annoying techniques. Finally, the acting is pretty solid overall, with a few exceptions.
The film does a few things quite poorly. While I wouldn't go so far as to say that it fails to create an engaging plot, the plot certainly leaves a lot to be desired. It seems as though it was glossed over rather than fully developed. Moreover, the writing is pretty poor throughout the movie. Some scenes play out laughably unrealistically, while others just leave too much up in the air.
Finally, I would mention that despite the fact that film is categorized as "action", you should not expect any real action scenes of any value.
I rate this movie 6 out of 10, and I don't recommend it for the average movie-goer, although those who have an inclination for one or more of the elements the film focuses around may find it enjoyable.
If you've seen Drive, then you should know that this movie is nothing like it, except perhaps in the fact that they are both beautifully shot. Drive had a pretty brisk pace, good dialogue, a plot that went somewhere, and a likable character.
Only God Forgives had none of that. This is a movie which moves along at a snail's pace, and even at a runtime of 90 minutes, it feels like many hours go by before even a single thing happens. Even the characters move and turn slowly.
The plot, such as it is, you would probably find worth watching, but Nicolas Winding Refn peppers it with pseudo-dream sequences and many pointless scenes that drag on for ever, so that the plot becomes hard to stay interested in.
Now, some things you might care about.
The acting. Ryan Gosling, of whom I was a fan in his earlier days, plays the same character from Drive, except that here he is indeed even more emotionless. He speaks about 5 lines during the whole movie, and has fewer different facial expressions. Kristin Scott Thomas is very good, although she feels underused. She is definitely the strong point of this movie. Vithaya Pansringarm, who plays a prominent role in the movie, is as expressionless as Gosling, although he is somewhat better, in my opinion.
Action scenes do exist, and they do resemble those from Drive, in that they are very matter-of-factly and visceral. Here, Winding Refn has really indulged in a lot of gratuitous gore, although overall, I found the action scenes quite entertaining. One particular one showcases Byron Gibson's acting talents, and it is particularly (and hilariously) cringe-worthy.
All the characters in this movie are unlikable. It is extremely difficult to get yourself to care for any of them, including Gosling's, who is arguably the protagonist here.
Aside from Scott Thomas' acting, the only other redeeming quality of this film is the excellent way in which most scenes are set up and shot. The sets, the camera movement, the placement of the actors, all of these make up for some truly gorgeous shots.
Overall, sad as I am to say it, I cannot recommend seeing Only God Forgives.
Only God Forgives had none of that. This is a movie which moves along at a snail's pace, and even at a runtime of 90 minutes, it feels like many hours go by before even a single thing happens. Even the characters move and turn slowly.
The plot, such as it is, you would probably find worth watching, but Nicolas Winding Refn peppers it with pseudo-dream sequences and many pointless scenes that drag on for ever, so that the plot becomes hard to stay interested in.
Now, some things you might care about.
The acting. Ryan Gosling, of whom I was a fan in his earlier days, plays the same character from Drive, except that here he is indeed even more emotionless. He speaks about 5 lines during the whole movie, and has fewer different facial expressions. Kristin Scott Thomas is very good, although she feels underused. She is definitely the strong point of this movie. Vithaya Pansringarm, who plays a prominent role in the movie, is as expressionless as Gosling, although he is somewhat better, in my opinion.
Action scenes do exist, and they do resemble those from Drive, in that they are very matter-of-factly and visceral. Here, Winding Refn has really indulged in a lot of gratuitous gore, although overall, I found the action scenes quite entertaining. One particular one showcases Byron Gibson's acting talents, and it is particularly (and hilariously) cringe-worthy.
All the characters in this movie are unlikable. It is extremely difficult to get yourself to care for any of them, including Gosling's, who is arguably the protagonist here.
Aside from Scott Thomas' acting, the only other redeeming quality of this film is the excellent way in which most scenes are set up and shot. The sets, the camera movement, the placement of the actors, all of these make up for some truly gorgeous shots.
Overall, sad as I am to say it, I cannot recommend seeing Only God Forgives.
I'm writing this review in the hope that you read it before you see this film, and that you do NOT see this film. As such, I won't spoil the plot for you.
I am not a comic book fan, so I had no expectations going into this movie, except what was promised by the trailers, and of course the previous Iron Man movies. I enjoy good movies of any genre equally, so I was really not prejudiced in any way. I thought the movie was pretty terrible, and very underwhelming and disappointing overall.
Let's start with the good.
Acting. Robert Downey Jr. is excellent as always. Sir Ben Kingsley and Guy Pearce are both predictably solid as well. The rest of the cast does not stand out, but overall the acting was a high point of the movie.
That's it. The acting (particularly RDJ) was the redeeming feature of the film. It's for that, and the good production value, that I rated this a 4/10.
Now, onto the bad.
The plot. It's convoluted, uninspired, and just plain boring. The movie is not about Iron Man being awesome, it's about the drama in Tony Stark's life as he tries to get over his near-death experience in The Avengers. The film plays out like a drama, with a bunch of weak sub- plots pulling at it from all directions. It's predictable at every step of the way, and it never really gets anywhere.
The dialogue. This movie strives hard to be funny. Tony Stark in particular is throwing one liners left and right throughout the movie. It works a few times, but more often than not it just falls flat. In any case, you've got a lot clichés again, especially when it comes to how Tony's inner struggle unfolds. Weak and very boring.
The action. There is little more action in this movie than there is in the trailer. In fact, I'd say the trailer makes the action look a lot better than it does in the movie itself. The action scenes themselves are OK, but very few for an "action" movie.
The trailers are selling this as a dark, almost Nolanesque look at Iron Man, but it's not that at all. It's just a pitiful mess that doesn't know what it wants to be. There's very little Iron Man in this movie. Whenever Tony gets into a suit, it breaks down or malfunctions right away, and it suddenly feels like his tech is being manufactured on a boat somewhere.
It's also worth noting that whereas Iron Man suit(s) were few and unique, in this movie he goes through perhaps 15 of them, making them feel more akin to pairs of sneakers.
To wrap this up, I would say that if you found what the trailers are presenting to be interesting, you will probably be disappointed. If you liked Iron Man 1, you will be disappointed. If you enjoy action, you will be disappointed.
This overly long movie will present you with seemingly hours of exposition. What's worse is that it's so predictable, that you feel like you've seen it all before even after the first few frames. Given another chance, I would never go to see this in the cinema again. It's just not worth the money.
I am not a comic book fan, so I had no expectations going into this movie, except what was promised by the trailers, and of course the previous Iron Man movies. I enjoy good movies of any genre equally, so I was really not prejudiced in any way. I thought the movie was pretty terrible, and very underwhelming and disappointing overall.
Let's start with the good.
Acting. Robert Downey Jr. is excellent as always. Sir Ben Kingsley and Guy Pearce are both predictably solid as well. The rest of the cast does not stand out, but overall the acting was a high point of the movie.
That's it. The acting (particularly RDJ) was the redeeming feature of the film. It's for that, and the good production value, that I rated this a 4/10.
Now, onto the bad.
The plot. It's convoluted, uninspired, and just plain boring. The movie is not about Iron Man being awesome, it's about the drama in Tony Stark's life as he tries to get over his near-death experience in The Avengers. The film plays out like a drama, with a bunch of weak sub- plots pulling at it from all directions. It's predictable at every step of the way, and it never really gets anywhere.
The dialogue. This movie strives hard to be funny. Tony Stark in particular is throwing one liners left and right throughout the movie. It works a few times, but more often than not it just falls flat. In any case, you've got a lot clichés again, especially when it comes to how Tony's inner struggle unfolds. Weak and very boring.
The action. There is little more action in this movie than there is in the trailer. In fact, I'd say the trailer makes the action look a lot better than it does in the movie itself. The action scenes themselves are OK, but very few for an "action" movie.
The trailers are selling this as a dark, almost Nolanesque look at Iron Man, but it's not that at all. It's just a pitiful mess that doesn't know what it wants to be. There's very little Iron Man in this movie. Whenever Tony gets into a suit, it breaks down or malfunctions right away, and it suddenly feels like his tech is being manufactured on a boat somewhere.
It's also worth noting that whereas Iron Man suit(s) were few and unique, in this movie he goes through perhaps 15 of them, making them feel more akin to pairs of sneakers.
To wrap this up, I would say that if you found what the trailers are presenting to be interesting, you will probably be disappointed. If you liked Iron Man 1, you will be disappointed. If you enjoy action, you will be disappointed.
This overly long movie will present you with seemingly hours of exposition. What's worse is that it's so predictable, that you feel like you've seen it all before even after the first few frames. Given another chance, I would never go to see this in the cinema again. It's just not worth the money.
