Change Your Image
martin-beks
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
New World Order: The End Has Come (2013)
There are several other movies about the Tribulation. Watch one of those
I don't know where to start. The poor script, mediocre acting, unnecessary scenes and twists that only made the movie longer? Plus the worst twist of all, when our main character changes her mind at the end, after a bit of character growth, ruining any arc she might have had. Plus, aside from a few mentions of God, there wasn't any actual information about the end times, except that everyone will be required to take the mark. There is a lot more to it than that, and not filling in that information did this film a massive disservice. If they'd included it, it could have been an interesting movie.
A lot of writers and filmmakers workshop ideas with other people. They share a script with several different people, allow others to point out questions or concerns. They should have done that with this movie.
Lightyear (2022)
Truthfully....boring
I liked the characters. I thought most of them were really fun, but the story they were given was absolutely bland. I feel like Buzz got better stories as a toy than as a "Real" person. He had more motivation and sass in the Toy Story movies. It's not often that a toy is better than it's movie counterpart (and yes, I realize Buzz what a toy as a movie character first, but the title card at the start said this was Andy's favorite movie. In 1995. I find that REALLY hard to believe, based on the world at that time).
Vanished (2016)
Really not bad at all
End times movies can seem really melodramatic (because when the rapture happens, the world WILL devolve into pure chaos), but this one, from a cinematic standpoint, was definitely better than most. The acting was pretty good (except for a really weird line here and there), and the stakes and tensions were high. I do ish there'd been a bit more theology, but I think the point of these movies is to warn people before it's too late, and by the end of the film, you could see how it connects to the other Left Behind books/movies.
Anne (2017)
Anne with an E...eh.
After finding two Anne remakes coming out this year, I was really anxious about both. How could they remake my beloved series, and would it be better or worse than the 80's version?
Honestly? Megan Follows can rest easy.
Don't get me wrong. It wasn't all bad. There was so much that I liked about the series, but then there was just so much that I absolutely hated.
The casting was spot on. I loved Geraldine James as Marilla. She was swarthy and stern, but there was definitely a heart of gold hiding there. And the show even flash backed to her own youth when she was in love with the father of a certain Carrot-loving popular boy. It was nice to see, not just imagine what went on between Marilla and Mr. Blythe. Also, apparently Mathew had a little romance in his history, too. I didn't know how anyone would make me love Mathew more than the late Richard Farnsworth, but R.H. Thomsen (a Road to Avonlea alum, actually!) did it. He was a cute old man who you just want to be friends with. When he goes to Charlottetown to buy Anne her first Puff-sleeved dress, he's put face to face with his childhood crush, who we find out crushed just as hard on him. *sigh* What might have been?
AmyBeth McNulty was an accurate Anne when she was off in her dream- inspired tangents. She had the red-headed fire and awkwardness that Anne needs to start out with, and when she's insulted, you'd better duck behind a table or else get a slate snapped over your head. Also, her eventual friendship with Gilbert was very fun and refreshing to see.
The Bad
Why? Why, why does EVERYTHING have to have a gritty remake? I blame Christopher Nolan but for Batman, another orphan, it worked. For Anne? It is downright freaking DEPRESSING.
I realize they were probably trying to make you feel sorry for Anne, and by understanding her past you can see where she is at present, but I don't think it's necessary. It's bringing in conversations that children don't necessarily need to know about. When Anne innocently talks about hearing the Hammonds engage in sex, and sometimes it sounded fun and other times it sounded like murder, her classmates were right to be horrified. While the town is horrified that a little girl is talking about sex, Mathew is more horrified that she even knows what it is. As the babysitter to three sets of twins (and also some singles), she had to have known about sex, and she probably also had to have known that it just wasn't spoken of.
What led to this conversation was Anne and Diana catching their teacher, Mr. Phillips, in the supply closet with older student, Prissy Andrews making out. In the book it was implied that the two were in a relationship, but it was out in the open, and her parents knew and supported their courtship. She was about sixteen, which was marriage age at the time.
What makes me cringe is just how much they were determined to show that Anne was before her time by having her say it. In 2017, twenty years after Spice Girls cried out "Girl Power" the fact that girls are still told that they can't follow their dreams makes me pause. It might just be my experience, but my parents never told me I couldn't do something. And my parents are about as conservative, anti-third wave feminist as you can get.
Who is telling you that you can't? Why can't you just do what you want to do? What I think it is is people telling girls "The World WILL tell you this."
This hasn't been my experience, ever, but whatever. I find the whole "Girls can do anything boys can do and better" shtick tiring. Just do it and down to the haters.
Bottom Line
What I think I hate most about this retelling is how much is unnecessarily added.
**Spoilers Ahead**
After the Brooch Incident, Marilla finds it after she's sent Anne packing, Mathew has to go after her but misses the train. He rides all night to the next depot, where he misses her again, and only finds her after suffering an injury, and she's busking poetry in the station after running away from the orphanage. She's angry and bitter and almost doesn't go back with him. Anne was never bitter toward Marilla and Mathew, even when Marilla was so strict.
Later, Gilbert's father dies, and Gilbert goes to Charlottetown to work the docks. Anne runs into him after Mathew's heart attack, and they're forced to sell their things. In the process, their farm boy, Jerry, who was tasked with escorting Anne, is robbed and beaten up, and later, the two ruffians who did it become boarders at Green Gables! Cliffhanger!
What is all of this unnecessary storytelling? Why are they handing us more fan fiction? Why is a gritty remake necessary?
Netflix really needs to bring back the star rating system, because I have such mixed feelings about this that a simple thumbs up or down won't do.
There were parts I loved and parts that were absolute garbage. I might keep going just because I want to see where it's going (And the casting WAS spot on).
Beauty and the Beast (2017)
Beauty and the Beast, A Review
A long time ago in a faraway land, there was a Prince who threw opulent parties. He taxed his kingdom to pay for them and only invited the brightest and most beautiful to attend. During one such party, a poor beggar woman arrived to wait out the storm that raged outside. She offered the Prince a rose in exchange for shelter, but he just laughed in her face. She gave him a second chance, but his heart still wasn't moved. She transformed him into a hideous beast, and the people in the castle who didn't flee in time became trinkets and furniture.
It's a Tale as Old As Time.
In 1991, Disney brought Beauty and the Beast into the world and a classic was born. When Disney announced they were filming a live- action version with Emma Watson in the title role, I was really apprehensive. I'm not a Watson fan, and I have always adored this story, so what was she going to do with one of my favorite princesses? As the months progressed and the rest of the cast came out, I found myself getting excited. Kevin Kline as Maurice? Ewan MacGregor as Lumiere? Ian MacKellan as Cogsworth? Audra MacDonald as Garderobe (the Wardrobe)? Stanley Tucci as Maestro Cadenza? EMMA THOMPSON AS MRS. POTTS?! This was a cast of epic proportions, and I was positive that no matter what I felt for Emma Watson, this film was going to be as good, if not better, than Cinderella in 2014.
And you know what? I was right.
They added a bit more backstory to make the Prince less of a spoiled child, and more of a misled young man. It was in the time before the French Revolution, which makes it historically accurate for him to throw these extravagant parties at the expense of his people, whereas in the cartoon, we only knew the story took place in France in a fairy-tale time period. What I love when films do this is that it makes it feel like magic is available in our own world.
As a longtime Disnerd and Beauty and the Beast music fan, I was extremely concerned with how they'd handle all of the music. Emma Watson has an okay singing voice, and her songs were fine, but when it came to the other characters songs, they completely blew her out of the water.
Ewan MacGregor's take on Be Our Guest was one I waited with bated breath to watch. If you recall in 1991, computer animation was still relatively new, and this was the song they used to create quite the visual treat. Could they do that again in live-action form? They did on Broadway, why not Hollywood? Well, to say they did would be a gross understatement. Plates and food were flying everywhere, there were feather dusters doing synchronized swimming, Belle tried to get a bite of everything they pushed in front of her, and you just got the impression that the showman that was Lumiere had been preparing for this moment his entire life, even before he became a candlestick.
I was a bit surprised that they didn't include the songs Human Again or If I Can't Love Her from the Broadway show, but they did give them new songs which added more characterization. The entire cast had the song, Days in the Sun, where they talked about their former lives and how they felt trapped because of the curse, and the Beast had Evermore where he sang about his former life and how he doesn't think he has a future, especially with his newfound feelings for Belle. The chills were there. It was amazing, and Dan Stevens (Matthew Crawley from Downton Abbey) has got some pipes on him.
I do have to say my favorite transformation throughout the entire film isn't the Beast or any of the staff. It's the unwitting character, LeFou. No, I'm not going to get political. But LeFou is this kid who has admired Gaston and has acted as his best friend for years. He would do anything for Gaston, or so he thinks. We all know Gaston to be a tool of epic proportions, but it's only when his actions become unsavory that LeFou starts to see him for who he truly is. That transition is a beautiful mirror against the transformation of the Beast in the castle. It was my absolute favorite part of the film. It was really, really great.
The only real thing I didn't care for was Emma Watson. I'm just not a fan. I think she's a wooden actress and was when she got into her older Hermione days in Harry Potter. I did like everything they did with Belle, though (she's the inventor now, and invented a washing machine so she could read instead of work. Props, girl!), and she also taught a town girl to read, much to the resentment of the town schoolmaster who didn't want "another one" to know how to read. Small minds, I tell you.
Okay, I didn't care for Ariana Grande's half of the Beauty and the Beast duet, either. She's in her twenties now. She should know what consonants are. Use your teeth to sing. Learn from Audra MacDonald, who didn't have nearly enough singing time, despite being half of the castle's entertainment with Stanley Tucci's Maestro Cadenza.
This film is filled with the same amount of fun and warmth and beauty as its predecessor, and then even more. It was well worth it to see it in theaters, and now that it's available on DVD and Blu- Ray, I'll be getting a copy to watch again and again. Please see this movie. Enjoy the magic, and mystery that the cast brought to a timeless tale.
Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (2016)
A Fun Film, but only if you're familiar with the Wizarding World
I really did enjoy most of this movie. I loved the four main characters, Newt, Tina, Jakob, and Queenie, and thought the movie probably could've been made around the four of them, but there were two side plots that felt completely out of place. They start the film with newspaper clippings on the disappearance of Gellert Grindelwald as well as stories on the New Salemers. None of this matters to Newt, who only wants to find Fantastic Beasts, as well as deliver one of them to Arizona. That's all well and good, but he gets entangled with the New Salemers, and later the MACUSA, the American Ministry of Magic. If you're unfamiliar with the Wizarding World, then a lot of this, especially the story of Grindelwald, might be confusing. I watched it with my father, who'd never seen the HP series (except the first movie, when it first came out), and he found it to be confusing. I found myself explaining the different spells and words to him, as well as explaining who Grindelwald was because they just never explained it very well. The same goes with the New Salemers. All we know about them is that they're super religious and anti-witch/wizard. The New Salemers felt like a cliché and were just put in for Tina's demotion from Auror to make sense. There was a lot of this that I did like. I really wish they'd spent more time on the actual Fantastic Beasts. The 1920's time period was absolutely delightful, especially with Muggle/No-Mag Jakob experiencing everything for the first time. I don't think the story was completely thought out, and it could've been a lot better. But, still fun for fans of Harry Potter. I really hope they clear up all of the questions in the second film.