moselekm
Joined Mar 2009
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.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Ratings81
moselekm's rating
Reviews33
moselekm's rating
This is gonna be a short one.
I love historical fiction. I like when they create realistic characters that play a part in a historical figure's life. Rome and Tudors are great examples of this. However this one not only creates a completely unrealistic character/hero that we follow around, it also creates fictitious events and characters that actually existed.
I was excited to hear about a show that was about young Octavius during his life before becoming absolute ruler of Rome and becoming the first true Emperor. Instead we learn about a child who is completely uneducated, lacking any charisma, and lacks any actual wisdom to be a powerful ruler. It's as if they wanted to explain the magnitude of his character by making him garbage in the start and progressing his character. Sorry, but Augustus has his life written about upwards, downwards, starboard to port. He was a great and ruthless man from start to finish.
Aside from the events and characters in history being completely destroyed or missing, the character who we piggyback on, Tyrannus, is a Gladiator who is basically the greatest fighter to ever exist. And you may be excited by hearing that, but if you combine all the fights scenes in the season of this show; it still wouldn't amount to a single fight scene from Rome or Gladiator.
The plot is flushed with historical butchery and massive plot holes. Along with that, you can't seem to find any love for any of the characters and if you have a seventh grade education or higher, you'll be in disbelief that this show actually got aired.
I love historical fiction. I like when they create realistic characters that play a part in a historical figure's life. Rome and Tudors are great examples of this. However this one not only creates a completely unrealistic character/hero that we follow around, it also creates fictitious events and characters that actually existed.
I was excited to hear about a show that was about young Octavius during his life before becoming absolute ruler of Rome and becoming the first true Emperor. Instead we learn about a child who is completely uneducated, lacking any charisma, and lacks any actual wisdom to be a powerful ruler. It's as if they wanted to explain the magnitude of his character by making him garbage in the start and progressing his character. Sorry, but Augustus has his life written about upwards, downwards, starboard to port. He was a great and ruthless man from start to finish.
Aside from the events and characters in history being completely destroyed or missing, the character who we piggyback on, Tyrannus, is a Gladiator who is basically the greatest fighter to ever exist. And you may be excited by hearing that, but if you combine all the fights scenes in the season of this show; it still wouldn't amount to a single fight scene from Rome or Gladiator.
The plot is flushed with historical butchery and massive plot holes. Along with that, you can't seem to find any love for any of the characters and if you have a seventh grade education or higher, you'll be in disbelief that this show actually got aired.
Let's get one thing straight with me. I hate action films that revolve around betrayal and/or romance. And because people seem to be horrible at even watching a film, I was completely scared of both of these when watching this film. Without giving anything away, there is everything in this movie and just the right amount of it.
UK Films that go back to 1400 AD and lower are always a treat. They give us their hallmark actors and actresses and we get to see them play, generally the same sort of role they did in their previous films. A nice little change is the Charismatic General, Dominic West, still plays his usual egocentric role, but instead of being the antagonist, he plays quite a lovable hero. His second up, Michael Fassbender who plays a determined and soulful leader, does a grand job to pick up on the other end of the scale. The supporting cast that we meet along the way are perfect for their roles and no one misses a beat.
This movie does have a storyline that does follow pretty accurate to Rome's history. Around the time of Emperor Commodus, best known for being in the movie Gladiator. However for history buffs, we know it was Commodus who began pushing for the island of Brittany. He was also the first 'duke'/'lord' of it as well. But no Emperor is mentioned, just a fun fact. Along with the accurate story-telling the movie does like to center itself around the fence of gore. Visceral Gore. Whoever began perfecting the use of CG-Gore, my hats off to them. Although it's pretty obvious when it's used, it allows for some crazy hack-n-slash effects. Such as cutting someone in half, cutting someone's arm off, cutting off half of someone's head. These sorts of things that make guys fist pump and lesser men cringe. But the gore is not out of bad taste.
I am going to begin speaking about the ending now. No spoilers, but if you read too far into it you may begin creating your own ending and I'd hate for you to go into this movie thinking you know the ending. -A lot of people didn't like the ending. They felt it was perhaps weak? I don't see it as weak. I see it as probably the best possible ending. I got exactly what I wanted to be honest. I think people go to movies and still expect faeries and unicorns to make everything be alright. But the facts are facts and this movie obeyed them as best as theatrically possible. +End Ending discussion~!
So in conclusion. The movie is amazing. I have to say it's one of the better historical-fiction films I have seen. I think I may like it better than 300; in terms of Greco-Roman history. The movie combines action with just enough character-interaction and drama to keep you interested. Don't expect any twist endings or even any tear jerkers. It's just a good film to watch alone or with some friends. It may even get you interested enough to begin researching the 'rust and iron' age of the Roman Empire.
UK Films that go back to 1400 AD and lower are always a treat. They give us their hallmark actors and actresses and we get to see them play, generally the same sort of role they did in their previous films. A nice little change is the Charismatic General, Dominic West, still plays his usual egocentric role, but instead of being the antagonist, he plays quite a lovable hero. His second up, Michael Fassbender who plays a determined and soulful leader, does a grand job to pick up on the other end of the scale. The supporting cast that we meet along the way are perfect for their roles and no one misses a beat.
This movie does have a storyline that does follow pretty accurate to Rome's history. Around the time of Emperor Commodus, best known for being in the movie Gladiator. However for history buffs, we know it was Commodus who began pushing for the island of Brittany. He was also the first 'duke'/'lord' of it as well. But no Emperor is mentioned, just a fun fact. Along with the accurate story-telling the movie does like to center itself around the fence of gore. Visceral Gore. Whoever began perfecting the use of CG-Gore, my hats off to them. Although it's pretty obvious when it's used, it allows for some crazy hack-n-slash effects. Such as cutting someone in half, cutting someone's arm off, cutting off half of someone's head. These sorts of things that make guys fist pump and lesser men cringe. But the gore is not out of bad taste.
- Like all British films that have such gore, it some how comes across as tasteful. I don't know if it's realistic, since I've never seen someone get axed in half, but they definitely shot for the grittiness of hand to hand combat. On that same note, many people I can imagine hated the director-of-photography. Many of the action scenes that involve many mêlées are broken up into almost an animate slide show of people putting the finishing blow on their opponent. Some of us may love it, while others enjoy more of the dramatic fights where swords cling more often than blood is spilled. But I'd like to think some of us are educated and know that is not how it worked back then.
I am going to begin speaking about the ending now. No spoilers, but if you read too far into it you may begin creating your own ending and I'd hate for you to go into this movie thinking you know the ending. -A lot of people didn't like the ending. They felt it was perhaps weak? I don't see it as weak. I see it as probably the best possible ending. I got exactly what I wanted to be honest. I think people go to movies and still expect faeries and unicorns to make everything be alright. But the facts are facts and this movie obeyed them as best as theatrically possible. +End Ending discussion~!
So in conclusion. The movie is amazing. I have to say it's one of the better historical-fiction films I have seen. I think I may like it better than 300; in terms of Greco-Roman history. The movie combines action with just enough character-interaction and drama to keep you interested. Don't expect any twist endings or even any tear jerkers. It's just a good film to watch alone or with some friends. It may even get you interested enough to begin researching the 'rust and iron' age of the Roman Empire.
And by dig, I mean make up something completely absurd. Ever have those friends at the dinner table who come up with some quack excuse on how a simple and often garbage movie should be seen as artful or a great piece for humanity? This should reawaken their gift of gab. Let's take a few solid facts of where this movie came from.
It came from a short story written for Playboy in 1970. It progressed into a teleplay in the mid and late 1970's and then reused again in the 80's reboot of the Twilight Zone. So as you can see, the story was basically made to be 19-25 minutes long plus commercials. Not made to be made into an almost two hour movie. I was actually blown away the movie was listed as breaking 90 minutes. I was confused onto what they could actually produce for such a simple story, even if they had materials to use from at least three different variants.
Now before I continue on any potential tangent on how this movie is lackadaisical in it's attempt to tell any single plot element, I will give it this. It will keep you interested and perhaps even guessing. However the movie starts and ends like a Twilight Episode, but instead of being satisfied; you realize you just watched a fifteen minute plot line being dragged out over 115 minutes worth of eerie plot-development. Which may sound awesome, but really, is the middle of the movie going to outweigh the end? The answer is no. You can maybe have flaws throughout the movie, but if you can't sell it at the end, then what the hell is the point? The movie has major plot holes, I'll let you find them for yourself, but they're their. Many people will also defend this movie by saying it's a scope on human emotions, selfishness, and any other community college notebook found in the desk of a psychology class. But the clear fact is, the movie wasn't even sure what direction it was going to take and any attempt to resolve that was completely dismissed with the ending. And let's get one thing straight. The ending doesn't upset me because it's not how I wished it to end or because I didn't get any answers. It upset me because it made no sense at all. At all. The movie seems to traverse about three major Occult subjects and it doesn't have the common decency to attempt to join them in some fashion to where they should be even introduced.
Now before someone tries to defend this by perhaps it's to be interpreted, that isn't the case. No string of intelligence could take this movie and actually produce some sort of linkage between them all. There isn't even a flow of evidence in this 'mystery/thriller'. It's just a congealed mess of what Richard Kelly's brain is.
And to conclude: Richard Kelly. He made a great little movie that has generated many interesting theories called: Donnie Darko. But that was his only movie that even bounded to a sense of reality and pseudo-fiction. Southland Tales was about nothing and all the other movies he is accredited to writing, he was the actually sole-visionary, so it doesn't really count. So basically, if you want a movie that will pique your interest and maybe jog your mind, then this is it. But wait, let me rephrase. If you're the kind of person like that AND also like a movie that insults any of your theories with a busted ending: this is it.
It came from a short story written for Playboy in 1970. It progressed into a teleplay in the mid and late 1970's and then reused again in the 80's reboot of the Twilight Zone. So as you can see, the story was basically made to be 19-25 minutes long plus commercials. Not made to be made into an almost two hour movie. I was actually blown away the movie was listed as breaking 90 minutes. I was confused onto what they could actually produce for such a simple story, even if they had materials to use from at least three different variants.
Now before I continue on any potential tangent on how this movie is lackadaisical in it's attempt to tell any single plot element, I will give it this. It will keep you interested and perhaps even guessing. However the movie starts and ends like a Twilight Episode, but instead of being satisfied; you realize you just watched a fifteen minute plot line being dragged out over 115 minutes worth of eerie plot-development. Which may sound awesome, but really, is the middle of the movie going to outweigh the end? The answer is no. You can maybe have flaws throughout the movie, but if you can't sell it at the end, then what the hell is the point? The movie has major plot holes, I'll let you find them for yourself, but they're their. Many people will also defend this movie by saying it's a scope on human emotions, selfishness, and any other community college notebook found in the desk of a psychology class. But the clear fact is, the movie wasn't even sure what direction it was going to take and any attempt to resolve that was completely dismissed with the ending. And let's get one thing straight. The ending doesn't upset me because it's not how I wished it to end or because I didn't get any answers. It upset me because it made no sense at all. At all. The movie seems to traverse about three major Occult subjects and it doesn't have the common decency to attempt to join them in some fashion to where they should be even introduced.
Now before someone tries to defend this by perhaps it's to be interpreted, that isn't the case. No string of intelligence could take this movie and actually produce some sort of linkage between them all. There isn't even a flow of evidence in this 'mystery/thriller'. It's just a congealed mess of what Richard Kelly's brain is.
And to conclude: Richard Kelly. He made a great little movie that has generated many interesting theories called: Donnie Darko. But that was his only movie that even bounded to a sense of reality and pseudo-fiction. Southland Tales was about nothing and all the other movies he is accredited to writing, he was the actually sole-visionary, so it doesn't really count. So basically, if you want a movie that will pique your interest and maybe jog your mind, then this is it. But wait, let me rephrase. If you're the kind of person like that AND also like a movie that insults any of your theories with a busted ending: this is it.