Dell's Good, Bad & Ugly Movie Reviews

[Rylo]

Just seen your Taken review.

Very nicely written review. I hope to have one up soon. To be honest I really didn't like the movie at all. Bored me.

[dell71]

Max Payne
2008. Rated PG-13, 100 minutes.
Director: John Moore.
Starring Mark Wahlberg, Mila Kunis, Beau Bridges, Amaury Nolasco.

Plot: Det. Max Payne (Wahlberg) seeks to solve the mystery of his wife's murder.

The Good: The movie consistently gives us interesting visuals. Chief among them being the demons all the junkies keep seeing. Some nice things happen during the action scenes as well. It's also nicely paced, fitting snugly into its 100 minutes.

The Bad: It commits the cardinal sin of not only being flat-out predictable but having cavernous plot-holes as well. The most troublesome aspect of the plot-holes is they don't seem to come from mistakes in the narrative but from the movie refusing to follow its own rules. The word "invincible" is key here. You'll notice how it doesn't mean the same thing for everyone. Oh, I fully understand that it is only a movie, and one based on a video game at that, but is it too much to ask for our hero to reload his handgun at least once every hundred shots or so?

The Ugly: The guy licking the super-drug/serum off the extremely wet and dirty floor...after its been stepped on.

Recommendation: Strictly as a movie, MP tells a bland story and tells it poorly. Full disclosure: I do know of the video game but have never played it and I'm not really familiar with its plot details. People who are may appreciate it more than I. For me, its simply par for the course as far as movies based on games go.

The Opposite View: James Christopher, Times Online (UK)

What the Internet Says: 5.5/10 on imdb.com (7/13/09), 18% on rottentomatoes.com, 31/100 on metacritic.com

MY SCORE: 4/10

[Buzzman]

Yea Max Payne was trash.

[Ralnakor]

Max Payne
2008. Rated PG-13, 100 minutes.
Director: John Moore.
Starring Mark Wahlberg, Mila Kunis, Beau Bridges, Amaury Nolasco.

Plot: Det. Max Payne (Wahlberg) seeks to solve the mystery of his wife's murder.

The Good: The movie consistently gives us interesting visuals. Chief among them being the demons all the junkies keep seeing. Some nice things happen during the action scenes as well. It's also nicely paced, fitting snugly into its 100 minutes.

The Bad: It commits the cardinal sin of not only being flat-out predictable but having cavernous plot-holes as well. The most troublesome aspect of the plot-holes is they don't seem to come from mistakes in the narrative but from the movie refusing to follow its own rules. The word "invincible" is key here. You'll notice how it doesn't mean the same thing for everyone. Oh, I fully understand that it is only a movie, and one based on a video game at that, but is it too much to ask for our hero to reload his handgun at least once every hundred shots or so?

The Ugly: The guy licking the super-drug/serum off the extremely wet and dirty floor...after its been stepped on.

Recommendation: Strictly as a movie, MP tells a bland story and tells it poorly. Full disclosure: I do know of the video game but have never played it and I'm not really familiar with its plot details. People who are may appreciate it more than I. For me, its simply par for the course as far as movies based on games go.

The Opposite View: James Christopher, Times Online (UK)

What the Internet Says: 5.5/10 on imdb.com (7/13/09), 18% on rottentomatoes.com, 31/100 on metacritic.com

MY SCORE: 4/10

Nah, you got it right. The movie had a lot of potential, but never even came close to delivering.

[dell71]

Valkyrie
2008. Rated PG-13, 120 minutes.
Director: Bryan Singer.
Starring Tom Cruise, Kenneth Branagh, Bill Nighy, Tom Wilkinson.

Plot: Col. Claus von Stauffenberg (Cruise) and some other higher ups in the Nazi party spearhead a plot to assassinate Adolf Hitler. Based on a true story.

The Good: It’s a thriller that has action scenes but doesn’t rely on them. In fact, it gets more mileage out of utilizing the most common military procedure: hurry up and wait. Such movies, especially ones that include a number of scenes based on the discussion of strategy can easily become bogged down by long stretches of boring conversations. This one never does. It actually uses those scenes to create tension and anxiety among the conspirators and in turn, the audience. It helps that the movie is tightly paced. Director Bryan Singer did a wonderful job in that department. Finally, the supporting cast is great. In particular, Bill Nighy and Tom Wilkinson deliver remarkable performances.

The Bad: Two giant personas detract from the film, Tom Cruise and Adolf Hitler. In Cruise’s case, his performance is neither good nor bad but just the same old stuff from him where he smirks a lot and points at the floor for emphasis when he’s yelling. That’s fine for the Mission: Impossible series where they’re basically selling you Tom Cruise: action star. Here, it feels off. He never seems to inhabit the role, so he’s never really believable. It doesn’t help that in no way, shape or form looks the part. So, it doesn’t even feel like Col. Stauffenberg is even in the picture. Instead, it feels like Tom Cruise is pissed at Hitler and wants him dead for murdering millions of scientologists, or something. This is another problem, and where Hitler’s persona comes into play. Why exactly do they want him dead? Yes, I know but what if by some chance, I didn’t? The movie assumes a working knowledge of the atrocities he’s responsible for. However, in the off chance someone goes in not fully aware they’d have nothing here to grab onto to make them understand how evil a man this was. The Hitler we see is merely some feeble old man that everyone is either actively protecting or trying to kill with only the vaguest reasons given for either. Hopefully, I’m way off base here but it seems this movie overestimates its audience.

The Ugly: Sometimes Tom Cruise wears his glass eye, sometimes he doesn’t.

Recommendation: This is a solid thriller based on historic events, not an action movie like it has been advertised. However, it’s not out to teach you any history other than the particulars of the operation itself. Therefore, your pre-existing level of appreciation, maybe even fondness for World War II will go a long way in deciding how much you like or dislike this movie.

The Opposite View: Joe Neumaier, New York Daily News

What the Internet Says: 7.4/10 on imdb.com (7/14/09), 61% on rottentomatoes.com, on metacritic.com

MY SCORE: 7/10

[NAHSTE]

Valkyrie
2008. Rated PG-13, 120 minutes.
Director: Bryan Singer.
Starring Tom Cruise, Kenneth Branagh, Bill Nighy, Tom Wilkinson.

Plot: Col. Claus von Stauffenberg (Cruise) and some other higher ups in the Nazi party spearhead a plot to assassinate Adolf Hitler. Based on a true story.

The Good: It’s a thriller that has action scenes but doesn’t rely on them. In fact, it gets more mileage out of utilizing the most common military procedure: hurry up and wait. Such movies, especially ones that include a number of scenes based on the discussion of strategy can easily become bogged down by long stretches of boring conversations. This one never does. It actually uses those scenes to create tension and anxiety among the conspirators and in turn, the audience. It helps that the movie is tightly paced. Director Bryan Singer did a wonderful job in that department. Finally, the supporting cast is great. In particular, Bill Nighy and Tom Wilkinson deliver remarkable performances.

The Bad: Two giant personas detract from the film, Tom Cruise and Adolf Hitler. In Cruise’s case, his performance is neither good nor bad but just the same old stuff from him where he smirks a lot and points at the floor for emphasis when he’s yelling. That’s fine for the Mission: Impossible series where they’re basically selling you Tom Cruise: action star. Here, it feels off. He never seems to inhabit the role, so he’s never really believable. It doesn’t help that in no way, shape or form looks the part. So, it doesn’t even feel like Col. Stauffenberg is even in the picture. Instead, it feels like Tom Cruise is pissed at Hitler and wants him dead for murdering millions of scientologists, or something. This is another problem, and where Hitler’s persona comes into play. Why exactly do they want him dead? Yes, I know but what if by some chance, I didn’t? The movie assumes a working knowledge of the atrocities he’s responsible for. However, in the off chance someone goes in not fully aware they’d have nothing here to grab onto to make them understand how evil a man this was. The Hitler we see is merely some feeble old man that everyone is either actively protecting or trying to kill with only the vaguest reasons given for either. Hopefully, I’m way off base here but it seems this movie overestimates its audience.

The Ugly: Sometimes Tom Cruise wears his glass eye, sometimes he doesn’t.

Recommendation: This is a solid thriller based on historic events, not an action movie like it has been advertised. However, it’s not out to teach you any history other than the particulars of the operation itself. Therefore, your pre-existing level of appreciation, maybe even fondness for World War II will go a long way in deciding how much you like or dislike this movie.

The Opposite View: Joe Neumaier, New York Daily News

What the Internet Says: 7.4/10 on imdb.com (7/14/09), 61% on rottentomatoes.com, on metacritic.com

MY SCORE: 7/10

Solid review. You liked it a little better than I did, but you pretty much felt the same way. Cruise was lacking in the lead role and the movie played out too much like a procedural in my opinion. No emotion, no memorable characters, just a by the numbers historical account for the most part.

[Buzzman]

I can understand why Dell didnt like Sunshine. I mean, at least for me, but if I dont like the person playing the main charactor its hard for me to like the movie. I cant really stand Meryl Streep or Amy Adams but usually there movies are good.

[dell71]

Solid review. You liked it a little better than I did, but you pretty much felt the same way. Cruise was lacking in the lead role and the movie played out too much like a procedural in my opinion. No emotion, no memorable characters, just a by the numbers historical account for the most part.

Thanx. It's not great but it kept me intrigued.

Disagree with the Sunshine review. It's one of my favorite movies. I think you missed something there. I understand it's not a 10/10, but 5/10 is way too low. I think a lot of people would really enjoy that movie - a 5/10 seems to say stay away. Not true.

Also the best Sci Fi movie to have come out in the past several years.

Valkyrie getting a higher score made me throw up in my mouth a little.

I can understand why Dell didnt like Sunshine. I mean, at least for me, but if I dont like the person playing the main charactor its hard for me to like the movie. I cant really stand Meryl Streep or Amy Adams but usually there movies are good.

As far as Sunshine goes, if I said it once, I've said it a thousand times (just in this thread, even in the review itself) how you feel about it depends almost entirely on your reaction to the change of direction in the latter third of the movie. I've already acknowledged if that was okay by you then you probably would think it was an excellent sci-fi flick. If that change was too jarring for you, like it was for me, then you'll feel it had great potential and was really good until it turned into a cheesy Alien ripoff.

You mean the guy from 28 Days Later? Cillian Murphy? Excellent actor....

Meh...I'm on record saying I think he's only been good in roles where he's the creepy guy: Batman Begins, Red Eye. I thought he was just kinda there in Sunshine. Strangely, a guy I really dislike gave a better performance...that guy (name not coming to me right now) who plays Johnny Blaze in Fantastic Four movies. Oh, I felt the same about Murphy in the overrated, and aforementioned 28 Days Later (dammit, there I go pissing you guys off, again).

[Buzzman]

his name is Chris Evans silly goose

[calgaryballer]

Meh...I'm on record saying I think he's only been good in roles where he's the creepy guy: Batman Begins, Red Eye. I thought he was just kinda there in Sunshine. Strangely, a guy I really dislike gave a better performance...that guy (name not coming to me right now) who plays Johnny Blaze in Fantastic Four movies. Oh, I felt the same about Murphy in the overrated, and aforementioned 28 Days Later (dammit, there I go pissing you guys off, again).

I was extremely surprised with Evan's performance in that movie. The FF movies were just a train wreck, none of them were given much to work with.

[A Tasty Burgerr]

If you've seen 12 Monkeys could you review it? Thanks

[Palooza]

12 Monkeys is FTW

[dell71]

:jimshake:

You should stay away from SciFi reviews.... damn, and I agree with all your other reviews too.

To be honest, I generally dislike most Zombie movies and I hated that one.

The shift at the end of the movie was needed IMO. The movie was built up to that point. Man's last obsticle was himself.... and his beliefs. And he wasn't a monster either, lol, a little deformed, but I don't think they ever went the alien route. If it's in space, people will always think it's a rip of Aliens... kinda sad.



No way he outperformed Murphy in Sunshine... no way. But I will agree Evans did well too. Only bad acting in that movie was the asian dude - the cook/mathematician. And Murphy's performance in 28 Days Later may be the best I've ever seen in a SciFi movie - he brought the intensity.

Meh...they receive a distress signal from another ship, decide to go help, go aboard said ship, don't find much but accidentally bring a creature (or "man" in this case) onto their own ship, creature ("man") tries to kill the whole crew. Sounds like Alien to me.

But I will give you credit, very nice explanation for the shift...but he was more than "a little deformed."

If you've seen 12 Monkeys could you review it? Thanks

I've seen it and already reviewed it (on that other site)...scroll down to my next post.

[dell71]

12 Monkeys
1996. Rated R, 130 minutes.
Director: Terry Gilliam. Starring Bruce Willis, Brad Pitt, Madeline Stowe, Jon Seda.
James Cole (Willis) believes he is a time-traveler sent back from the future by his captors to investigate "the Army of the 12 Monkeys." This "army" apparently loosed a virus upon the Earth. This virus is believed to have killed 5 billion people and driven the survivors to live beneath the planet's surface. The movie opens with a quote that is actually a prediction that this whole virus thing would go down in 1997. It's attributed to a "diagnosed schizophrenic." This is key because the question of Cole's sanity is really the central theme of the movie. A brief soliloquy by a patient in the mental institution Cole is thrown into when he arrives in the year 1990 explaining his own mental condition gives us a possible explanation of what's actually going on. Of course, the alternative is that Cole is perfectly sane but indeed living in an insane reality. To his credit, director Terry Gilliam doesn't discount either possibility giving viewers something to debate. Willis gives a frantic, even fragile performance befitting the role. Stowe is solid as usual but Brad Pitt lights up the screen during the intervals in which he appears. Overall, it's an excellent, if a bit quirky, piece of science fiction. MY SCORE: 9/10

[Palooza]

I watched American Pie on VHS at work the other day.

Classic.