Change Your Image
dspman11
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Breaking Bad: Blood Money (2013)
"If you don't know who I am, then...maybe the best course...would be to tread lightly."
Wow! In the long-anticipated premiere of the summer, Breaking Bad wastes no time jumping right into what will be the conclusion of a fantastic series. The episode was captivating and featured great acting from Dean Norris, Bryan Cranston, and certainly Aaron Paul.
I love the character of Walter White as of now. Actually, I hate him. I hope he dies. However, the Breaking Bad viewers are very evenly split between liking Walt and hating Walt. That's why I love the character. Watching this episode, you could say that Walt is trying his best to get on the road to redemption: he's out of the business, his cancer is back, and he's getting more and more involved in his family life once more. You could also watch this episode and say Walt is a two-faced liar who shouldn't even go by the name Walter White anymore; Heisenberg should be his permanent name. I'm in the latter group. But the writing and acting in this show lets viewers have more than one opinion on the character, something fresh and unique in the world of television that Breaking Bad has been flaunting for many seasons now.
It's hard not to feel bad for Jesse Pinkman. The episode is accurately titled "Blood Money" because of Jesse's guilt over owning $5 million in "blood money." It's interesting to see Jesse try to get Saul to give the money away when common sense says it could never work out. Mike's granddaughter's account is under full surveillance by the DEA and the parents of the child shot in "Dead Freight" would simply be confused by the $2.5 million at their doorstep and it would probably do little for their psyche. But Jesse doesn't think it through. He's in a dark place. And the way he disposes of the money at the end of the episode is simply riveting. Aaron Paul is a gifted actor.
What to do with Lydia? Lydia is a loose end. I'm worried that the "moving parts" and the falling business she talked to Walt about may come back to bite Walt. Lydia is known for being very easy to squeeze answers out of. If Walt receives any sort of threat from the drug world, it will most certainly be Lydia's fault. It is my prediction that Lydia is an indirect cause of what we see in the cold opening of this episode; Walt's identity figured out and the house in ruins.
And finally what everyone is talking about: the confrontation between Walt and Hank. I predicted that there would be a confrontation in this episode, and I was not disappointed. Dean Norris is a very talented actor, and Cranston also plays it off beautifully. My only issue: the idea of "What's the point of convicting me if I'm going to die?" seemed rather silly to me. What about what it'll do to Hank's career? How it'll totally destroy the White and Schrader families? How Walt Jr. and Holly will grow up fatherless because their uncle exposed their father out to be a drug lord? How it'll be hard for Hank to convince anybody that he wasn't in on it with Walt from the beginning (the ride along from Season 1 Episode 1 where Hank let Walt look at the meth lab, the fact that Hector saw Hank last before he killed Gus (who's to say it wasn't Hank who strapped that bomb to him?)). So many things Walt could have said, but the cancer bit...I don't know. They could've went in a number of different directions. Even when Walt says, "My cancer's back," it seemed like an awkward interjection. It didn't fit with the mood of the scene. That's my only criticism of the scene though.
So what will happen? How will Hank approach this? What sort of danger does Walt face now? And who is that ricin from the cold opening for? All questions that will be answered in the final episodes of this exceptional series. I can't wait.
I give the episode a solid 8.5 out of 10.
Iron Man Three (2013)
Ten times better than Iron Man 2, not quite as good as Iron Man, a pretty solid flick by itself.
After seeing Iron Man 2 (which, not to sugarcoat, was a pile of garbage), I wasn't going to bother seeing Iron Man 3. I was dragged to see it, and I must say, I enjoyed it. Some are saying it's the best of the three, but it doesn't touch the first one. But it's also leagues better than the second.
I'll make this review short and address my complaints and the complaints of others. This is a non-spoiler review, so I'll be as vague as possible. Many people complained about how the movie used the character of the Mandarin because it was so unlike the comics. I never read the comics so I personally don't give a damn. I liked what they did, and it was a cool plot twist.
My own biggest complaint was...there was way too much comic relief. The writer(s) of this film thought of a joke for every line and just had to put it in. The amount of comic relief in the first two were perfect, they went overboard in this one. So many people die in this movie. I don't mean main characters. I mean nameless extras. So many die. It's not even funny how many people die in a PG-13 Marvel movie. In addition to one-liners every ten seconds. It was a strange, uncomfortable combination.
I enjoyed the ending, not going to spoil anything, but I liked it a lot. I'd rather not add to spoilers to this review, but random extremely vague point: if you were thinking of the question "why not sooner?" at the very end, it's explained in the comics. Google it. The movie did a poor job of explaining it.
Overall, 7/10.
The Great Gatsby (2013)
The "Okay" Gatsby (I will warn when spoilers come about)
I've given this a 10 out of 10 because on this website, in order to change the overall rating in any way you either give it a 1 out of 10 if you didn't like it or a 10 out of 10 if you did like it. And I liked it. But it was not a perfect film.
First off, I could tell right from the beginning of this film that it would divide Gatsby fans. Baz Luhrmann's direction and the overall cinematography of this film was...strange. Similar to his "Romeo + Juliet" remake, which to be honest, I kind of liked.
(Semi-spoiler alert, but, it's in the first 30 seconds of the film)
Baz depicts Nick Carraway as an alcoholic and insomniac, after the events of the Great Gatsby. The premise as to why Nick is telling the story of Gatsby is that he is in a session with a therapist or some kind of doctor, and he is venting. The doctor eventually suggests he writes this story down, and he does.
A lot of people did not like this idea, but I loved it. I thought it was extremely creative of Luhrmann to make his own spin as to how his interactions with Gatsby and the rest changed him forever. It was also a creative way to introduce exactly why we were hearing the story in the first place.
(no more spoilers for now)
I'd like to say Baz Luhrmann followed the book pretty damn closely. I wasn't sure if I liked the film during its first half. It seemed jumpy, and very...big. Every moment, every one of Gatsby's (and Buchanan's, actually) parties seemed so big. Everything was done so big the big moments didn't seem to feel as big as they should have.
A big reason I didn't like the film was the soundtrack. Florence + The Machine works for Gatsby. Jay-Z doesn't. It's an awkward pairing, Gatsby and hip-hop. It didn't work for me. And it took away from some moments, ESPECIALLY...
(alright spoiler alert again)
...Myrtle's death, which I might add, was done extremely poorly. Her body was also catapulted at least 30 feet in the air. I don't know what song played during her death, but it ruined it. Also, the overall scene was just shot poorly. If you hadn't read the book, you'd probably have not the faintest clue what was happening.
(no more spoilers again)
Let's talk about the acting. I have a beef with Leonardo DiCaprio. He seems to always play himself. He doesn't seem to have much of a range. Even in J. Edgar, I said to myself, "That's DiCaprio with a light accent and grey hair." He didn't look, talk, or act like Hoover. He generally looks, talks, and acts like himself. Luckily for DiCaprio, he has fantastic stage presence, so he gets credit for being the actor he is. I was disappointed when I liked his portrayal of Gatsby, because Gatsby isn't a reach for DiCaprio. It's another opportunity for Leo to play himself and get commended for it. He should get commended for it. He was a great Gatsby (no pun intended). But he didn't really have to struggle to obtain that look, that talk, etc. He plays himself again, but he does it really well.
Toby Maguire is another actor I've never been too fond of. I can't think of another movie that I thought he acted well in besides Pleasentville. Don't bring up Spider-Man, especially the third one. But I thought he was a very good choice to play Nick. He did a very good job, I was pleased.
Joel Edgerton is a guy not enough people know, and I feel that his name was just overshadowed by Leonardo and Toby. He did a phenomenal job as Buchanan. He portrayed Tom exactly how I think he should have been portrayed.
Carey Mulligan...was very good. But I have trouble with Luhrmann's characterization of Daisy. If you read the book, Daisy is supposed to be, for lack of a better term, a "fake bitch". She leads Gatsby on but really just crawls back to Tom. You really don't like her, and then you feel bad for Gatsby. In Luhrmann's film, you think of Gatsby as a moron for waiting for Daisy, and you feel sorry for Daisy instead. This probably isn't Mulligan's fault, but Luhrmann's instead.
(massive spoilers ahead)
Holy crap, Gatsby's death was done so well. Even as a reader of the novel, who was expecting it, they made the gunshot so unexpected, everyone in the theater jumped. People around me were crying. No matter how many gripes I had with the film, the last 15 minutes of the film were AMAZING. His death, his "funeral", the last couple of lines from Nick. It was all stunning cinema.
OVERALL, I'm giving this a 7 out of 10. Much better than the Robert Redford version, followed the book fairly closely, and the last 15 minutes of the film are able to make up for whatever flaws you found in the middle (minus that one scene that I mentioned earlier. That scene still sucks and it still angers me).
The Big Bang Theory (2007)
One of the least intelligent, moronic sitcoms in television history
I have never seen a TV show so undeserving of a rating above an 8.0. "The Big Bang Theory" is humor for people who don't like to think. Recycled jokes, overused laugh tracks - it's the perfect show for those with an IQ under 100.
There is little to no character development (by the way, the characters are not very likable, ESPECIALLY Sheldon. One of the most annoying characters in a movie or TV show...ever.)
I honestly despise this show and its popularity. How does it have an 8.6? IMDb is better than that.
I suggest people check out "Louie", "It's Always Sunny in Philly", or the original "Office". That is humor, and smart humor at that! None of this recycled humor that literally insults the average person's intelligence.
The Dark Knight Rises (2012)
An utter disappointment. Did Nolan direct this?
I am a HUGE fan of both Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. I believe that they are both stunning works of cinema. I also believe that The Dark Knight Rises was good, but not Dark Knight trilogy good. Not Nolan good. Not by a long shot.
I saw Rises at midnight, and I loved it. Of course, when you're looking forward to a film for 4 years and you're at the midnight showing, you're not looking at the movie from a critical standpoint. You're just sitting back and enjoying the epicness of it all. It wasn't until my 2nd and 3rd viewings that I saw the many plot holes in this lackluster film.
This will contain spoilers from this point on.
My first gripe is with Gordon's decision to send all 3,000 of Gotham City's cops underground. Alright, you can twist it however you want, sending every single police officer in the city to such an isolated location is just STUPID. End of story.
Another gripe I have is when Fox starts the reactor for Bane. Why did he not flood the chamber instead? Wouldn't that be the smarter thing to do? He would have saved Gotham City right there.
Another gripe is the 'Bane's Prison/Hell' scene. I don't know where he is, but it certainly isn't anywhere in the United States. How does he get such good television reception from Gotham City? And the golden question: how the hell does he get back...and how the hell does he KNOW how to get back? A last gripe (this may or may not be a plothole, I may be a little TOO critical with this point) how does nobody recognize Wayne in Italy? It was said in the first movie, Wayne is known everywhere. He had to go deep, deep, deep into Asia to disappear. I highly doubt Italy is a country that is unaware of Wayne.
From a director that pays such great attention to detail, this movie was the exact opposite. I know what you're saying. "If those things didn't happen, then other things in the movie couldn't happen." How about they do something that WOULD happen and not something dumb, and then go from there? A perfect example of a work like that - the original series "Breaking Bad". It follows logical events that may or may not go along with the storyline, and then go from there. So there are no stupid moments, no plot holes. Just...great writing and direction. And that's what TDKR needed.
House M.D. (2004)
One of the most intelligent programs in television history - not your average medical show
I never paid much attention to "House MD" when it first premiered. I heard from a couple of people that it was basically the same thing every episode: Impossible disease to diagnose, House messes with his team, House suddenly solves the case.
But one day when I was bored, I switched the TV to House. And it happened to be the Season 6 finale (titled "Help Me"). Going to be honest, it blew me away. I did not know what was happening to the characters at the point in the story, but the acting was fantastic. The atmosphere was superb. The complexity of Dr. Gregory House intrigued me. I saw him as a tragic hero (something you find in works of literature) and his tragic flaw was his leg. Not only the physical limitations brought on by his leg, but the mental ones as well. The pain he suffers day by day that lead him to be the man he is. You see House as an ass...but you feel for him, because you know why he's an ass. Also, Hugh Laurie does such a good job with his accent, if I had not watched "A Bit of Fry and Laurie", I probably never would have guessed Hugh was British.
"House" is like a beautiful novel. It has its themes from episode to episode, and it has its overall themes as a television show. It is a work of art, and I hate that so many dismiss it because of its premise in a hospital. I have watched every episode of "House" since I first saw it and those were many hours well spent. If you've never seen it...the Complete Series is on DVD now!