Change Your Image
Optimus_
Reviews
The 13th Warrior (1999)
Severelly underrated masterpiece
OK, let's get things straight: The 13th Warrior isn't a masterpiece in the sense we use for "Citizen Kane", for example. As some have already pointed out, the plot is quite thin (even if you have to be totally illiterate in order not to figure out this wants to be a re-interpretation of Beowulf) and has some bad inconsistencies. Of course there's no way an Arab (speaking a semitic language) would learn old Norse (indo-european language) in a few weeks by just listening etc etc etc.
HOWEVER, this isn't what this movie is about. The 13th Warrior is just a vehicle made to get the modern-day man in touch with the "kill or be killed", "stand your ground or everyone in your village dies" spirit. I mean, if the scene where Buliwyf barely drags his feet (and his sword) to stand in the way of the incoming onslaught of the primitive's cavalry charge doesn't fill you with adrenaline (and with the sudden urge to grab a damn spear or something) it means that you're either a old woman or... (well, let's not go there, you know what I mean :D )
On top of that, I'm willing to bet that many of the bad reviews are actually caused by the very positive depiction that this film gives to Arabs. Add positive view on Arabs to Norse mythology and you easily can figure out why some critics will rate this movie as complete crap. Well, it isn't.
Someone wrote here (with acted disgust) that this is a movie for men who like to bang their chest with their fists (gorilla style). Well, I ask you: should we completely forget what we're actually made of? :D
Robin Hood (2010)
A great director+two great actors+a classic story to start from => COMPLETE CRAP
Someone here said that the last 30 minutes turned a strong 9+ movie into a poor 6- movie. I'd say he was extremely generous with the first two hours of this film!
First, this Robin Hood isn't the classic story (as it can be found in Ivanhoe and in the 1938 movie). This shouldn't necessarly be something bad, but the movie's new Robin Hood plot also fails miserably in being historically accurate. And, in the end, the plot also makes little to no sense from start to finish.
I don't mind someone reinventing a Robin Hood, I can even deal with it being so historically inaccurate, but I really don't want to watch movies with logical goofs all over the place.
Add to this the fact that Russell Crowe looks extremely bored trough most of the movie, and you'll get the full picture of this failure called Robin Hood. Sure, Cate Blanchett gives it a try, but is far from shining at her best, and Max von Sydow's part is way too small to make his formidable acting really count. Mark Strong tries hard but his role is so unidimensional and dull that it gives him no chance.
Overall the movie is a 5+ or 6- but nothing more.
Max Payne (2008)
Don't buy the critics from the hardcore game fans
You'll see a lot of critics from people who think that not following exactly the game's plot/scenario/character buildup/whatever is wrong. Quite the opposite, this is exactly what makes Max Payne a good, standalone movie. It's the best Hollywood attempt to make a film noir in the last 5-6 years. The plot has logic and, what is very important (at least to me) the violence serves the plot, not vice-versa.
Actors perform very well, the script has tension and, overall, we're talking about a movie that doesn't have obvious flaws at any level. 8/10, definitely worth seeing.
A 9/10 for Max Wahlberg, probably the best pick possible today for the role.
Orient Express (2004)
one of the worst movies of the well known director Sergiu Nicolaescu
It's hard to find a single good aspect of the movie, except for strong acting from romanian star Gheorghe Dinica and surprisingly nice performance of Valentin Teodosiu, an actor which i my opinion deserves better roles then he usually gets in movies.
For the rest, the didactic speech of the main character, spread over half the movies, practically kills any interest for the picture quite quickly.
Mr Nicolaescu should realise that the audience is hardly interested in his vision about nobility, or in a romantic image of the last days of the romanian aristocracy.
With the two exceptions already mentioned, acting is 70'ish and of a poor quality, the movie has lost of clichés and generally speaking, without being a horrible experience, is practically a waste of time to watch.
Quo vadis (2001)
The best ecranisation so far of this famous novel
Well acted,respecting the novel's plot and spirit, excellent costumes. IMO this is the best ecranisation of this Nobel prize novel,beating by far the 1951 classic.The only debatable part lasts a few seconds at the very end.