'Get Smart' (2008) movie review

I saw this movie yesterday and decided to review it, because all of the negative reviews it's been getting. So Get Smart is a spy-parody-movie, based on a spy-parody-series from the 70's of the same name. Never seeing the series, I cannot tell you, if they butchered the characters or anything like that, as for me this was simply a spy-parody-movie. The plot is pretty simple: Steve Carell plays Maxwell Smart, a brilliant analyst, who dreams of being a field agent and is finally able to live his dream, after something-something-that-makes-all-the-other-agents-unable-to-do-it occurs. Sort of like Johhny English, I tought and I liked Johnny English. But did I like this?

First of all, I was very disappointed when I saw the commercials for this movie. It made it look so stupid, just full of horrible slapstick, that will surely satisfy masses, but disappoint anyone, who needs a bit of brains to laugh. Then I also read the bad reviews and tought to myself, 'what kind of braindead shit would this be', but I was actually pleasantly surprised. One of the reasons I had some hope was Steve Carell. I seem to be one of the rare people who actually like this guy and think of him as a good comedic actor. He's got great comedic timing and a weird voice and all that, maybe making him only able to play losers or idiots - but he plays losers or idiots awesome. And Steve Carell was as always - great in this movie. Alan Arkin and James Caan are pretty hilarious in their side/extended cameo roles, while the rest of the cast doesn't have much space to show good acting, but still do their work solid.

The movie is predictable, to be honest. The story isn't anything, because it doesn't really matter. But it's a lot funnier then I tought it would be. All those slapstick scenes in the trailers are actually pretty funny in the actual movie and the rest of humor is a whole lot brighter then expected, as I genuinely laughed my ass off a couple of times while watching. The only gripe I have about it are a few shots. It's a spy movie, so it has to have action. And it has action, and that action isn't that bad, but just a couple of shots in between, not really scenes, but actual shots (you'll see it) look like, they are filmed with a phone. Sounds weird, I know, but you'll notice it soon. Altough it doesn't affect the movie much, it makes it look like a cheap TV-spy movie sometimes (which it isn't). So in conclusion, Get Smart comes pretty close to actually being smart and was bashed for no reason..


Total rating: 7 / 10


So what did you think of Get Smart? Do you like Steve Carell? Do you hope they will going to make a sequel? Comment below, let me know!

'Looper' movie review

I finally managed to see the highly anticipated sci-fi thriller Looper. The movie really intrigued its audience with a cool trailer and a cool premise. The film is set in the near future, where time-travel has already been invented, but quickly became restricted and is only used by large criminal organizations. Because everyone in the future is under some kind of control, it's basically impossible to kill someone or dispose a body, so these mobs have to kidnap their victims and send them 30 years back into the past onto a point, where a hired gun, known as a looper is waiting to kill them. But the moment in the trailer that really intrigued everibody was where Joseph Gordon-Levitt, a looper is waiting for his next target to show up, only to discover - his target is Bruce Willis, himself from the future.

When I saw the trailer, I was kinda worried that the movie really blowed of its trick, its twist or basically the intriguing plot point. But when I saw the great reviews coming in, I realised there's a whole lot more to Looper then its premise, and I was right. The story is original, mind-bending, and at the same time - has heart. But the screenplay is not only great in terms of the storyline, but also in the realistic and witty (but not too funny) dialogue between the characters. I don't know who really to thank here, was it make-up or special effects or whoever made Gordon-Levitt EXACTLY like Bruce Willis. He doesn't look a bit like himself and also delivers some great acting. He really nails Bruce Willis's mimics and way of speaking, but still doesn't work like a cheap copy or an impersonator, but an interesting and amazingly portrayed character. Howewer, the thing that really makes the movie is Rian Johnson's directing.

Looper is incredibly more stylized then I tought it would be. There are these minor details that spark around the world of the future. For an example, the movie never really explains how time-travel works in it, how the world is under control and all those things, but rather just concentrates on the story and the characters, so these details really just work like sparkling gems, scaling the futuristic scenery. Johnson's directing style is great and somewhere (as weird as it sounds), a mix of J.J. Abrams and Wes Anderson. You have Abrams's enyoyable and effective shaky-cam scenes and lens flares and Anderson's ironically-artsy camera spins and turns that make the innovative action scenes even more enyoyable. The original score by a first-time-hear composer who is quite probably the director's brother or something and is like a mic of that annoying electronic trailer music (but not annoying in this movie) and a few minimalistic piano pieces.

                                              

But no matter to all of these good things, I cannot deny that I just expected the movie to be more, then it was. It's actually quite slow in parts, has a few amazing visuals, but still works more of an artsy movie sometimes. Perhaps my expectations were simply too high, as I tought of all the hype and raving reviews, this would be some kind of Inception, but it simply wasn't. I don't want to compare the two movies too much, since they are completely different, but the film just didn't reach my expectations. But in conclusion, Looper still is an original, intriguing and entertaining film, and quite probably the best sci-fi movie I've seen for some time.

Total rating: 8 / 10 

So what did you think of Looper? Did it reach your expectations? Were you satisfied with the mixed-felt ending? Comment below, let me know!

'The Lone Ranger' first trailer review

The first trailer for the 2013 action-adventure film, The Lone Ranger has appeared out of nowhere and normally, I woudn't even consider writing about this, but since I am dealing with the diseases known as bordom and a need to practice writing, I have decided to review this trailer. Now the movie is actually coming out in July, so you could probably expect a teaser trailer, but this is basically looks more like a second half of a real trailer, and it's pretty decent. The first half of it are studios showing off their logos and then you see some kind of a typical Western-ish town and people talking about powerful people and then some cool music with Johnny Depp as some Indian shaman (refreshing to see him as a weirdo, isn't it?) and Armie Hammer as some kind of a Cowboy Zorro and that's practically it. You don't really know much about the story, but it looks like you don't really need to. 

If Armie Hammer is The Lone Ranger, why are Johnny Depp's eyes on the poster?

Before this trailer we didn't really have much info on the movie. We knew it was directed by Gore Verbinski, produced by Disney, had the title The Lone Ranger and was starring Depp and Hammer as a Cowboy and an Indian, as the only possible teaser picture on the planet illustrated us. And we that info, I was kind of thinking to myself, that the movie could really go into two directions. It could either take itself too seriously and try to be some kind of a western-throwback or it could just be a slightly ironic and entertaining   western-y adventure movie a.k.a. "Cowboys of the Caribbean". I think they will probably go for the second direction, since the movie is produced by Disney, for god's sake. I also hope so, since it could turn out to be quite a fun film. Just as a piece of interesting trivia, the movie is actually based off an old TV-series, in which the main character's (Lone Ranger's) nephew's son eventually became The Green Hornet in a spin-off series. I'm pretty sure this will not tie with the entertaining 2011 Green Hornet film, but it could relate to it in "butchering" and at the same time, ressurecting a dead franchise.

So what do you think of the trailer? Are you interested in seeing the movie? What kind of movie do you think will it turn out to be? Check the trailer out here, comment below, let me know!

'Skyfall' Adele promo review

The newest trailer (I'd say it's a trailer, officially it's an "Adele promo"?) and quite possibly the final one for the upcoming James Bond movie, Skyfall has hit the web and I am here to write about it. Now this trailer/promo/whatever it is, is basically a montage of different scenes with no dialogue, no sound effects, only featuring the brand-new-revealed title song, Skyfall by Adele. We see some of the shots we saw from the previous trailers, like Daniel Craig trapping scorpioms with a glass in an obscure Bolgarian bar, M standing next to a bunch of coffins with english flags on them, Javier Bardem's hair menaciously walking around and overall it's a very cool trailer, but at least for me, it had something more.

Now to be honest, I wasn't exactly eagerly expecting this movie, as I am simply not a fan of the Daniel Craig James Bond. I don't mean Daniel Craig as James Bond, I think he's okay, but the style of the movies, he stars in. As much as I love the dark, brutal and realistic feel to Batman, I grew up watching the cartoonish and humorous Pierce Brosnan James Bond movies and they just burned that image of James Bond into my head, even tough knowing, this interpretation is actually more 'true' to the original books. I saw Casino Royale and it was good, but nothing spectacular for me, I didn't see Quantum of Solace (or heard a lot of good stuff about it), so I wasn't even planning to see Skyfall. The first teaser that came out was extremely cool, especially because of that awesome James-Bond-theme-techno-riff-remix, that was used in it, but was just a cool trailer and nothing more for me. The second trailer was okay and revealed a lot more about the story, but it still didn't made me want to see the movie. 

And now this came out. I don't know why, but it just has more of that Bond-tastic feel to it. The first two trailers had the Daniel-Craig-Bond-tastic feel to it, but this one, with all the explosions and the title song and Bond fucking random girls and Bond adjusting his sleeves after falling onto a train and similar stuff, which reminded me of the cartoonish Pierce Brosnan James Bonds. I am not saying, that this will be a cartoonish Pierce Brosnan James Bond, I'm just saying, this trailer made it look more like that, then the first two did. And as much as I know, this will be a dark, brutal and realistic Daniel Craig James Bond, this trailer just lit a bit of that spark, that spirit of the movies that I'm used to. One of the things, that also made me interested, was this guy.

I remembered, I've seen him before somewhere and realised, it was Ben Wishaw, the guy reading the letters and playing the piano in the epic Cloud Atlas trailer, but I was even more shocked, when I discovered, he was actually playing Q. Q, James Bond's old and cool gadget supplier! Then I remembered, that these movies are basically sort of prequels and that Casino Royale was based on the very first book, so they are actually introducing young, hipster-ish Q, which is awesome! So then I took a look at the old trailers and realised...all of these things were in the second trailer already. There is nothing particularly new. But I did see the second trailer and saw all the same things, but they just didn't have the same effect on me. I actually saw this guy introducing as Q, but it just didn't attract my attention. I don't know what it is with this trailer, but I have to assume it's the very good Adele title song, that just pulled all of these elements together and actually attracted my attention with the same things, things that I already saw. In conclusion, I am just really thankful to this trailer/promo, as if I would probably never plan to go see the movie, if I hadn't seen it. 

So what do you think of the trailer/promo? Are you going to see the movie? What do you think of the title song? Check the trailer out here, comment below, let me know!

'Batman: Arkham City' videogame review

I know that this is very late and that nobody will probably read this and that this game is SOOOO LAST  YEAR, but around the time when it was 'all the rage', I didn't even know about, it so I torrented it a few months ago and it took me over so much, I had to review it. I haven't played its predecessor Batman: Arkham Asylum either, so don't expect any big comparations, just my simple toughts on it. So Arkham City is an action-adventure game in which you control Batman, which gets trapped in the controversial superprison, known as Arkham City.  Batman must uncover and foil the notorious plan by the evil Dr. Hugo Strange, only known as  'Protocol Ten' as well as intersecting in all the gang wars, battles for control and  other connections made through the veins of this vast prison, which is basically like a small town, except that it's full of power-thirsty psychopaths with no regard for human life.

Now this game got a shitload of praise and you know what? It fucking deserved it. First of all, the graphics are amazing. The whole wide world of the Arkham City superprison is awesome and greatly matches the dark tone of the Batman story.  Second, the gameplay is amazing. One of the reasons, that the game is so popular, is because people love being bad-ass. And people love being Batman. And what's better then being a bad-ass Batman? A very bad-ass Batman indeed, as you're able to glide off a building, doing a dive bomb downwards and crashing like a ninja, then releasing a shockwawe to stun several nearby hostiles, then punching one in the face, while already kicking the second one and countering a third one's attack in the same second, evading a bullet and throwing a few batarangs, then smash two guys's heads together and generally being the biggest bad-ass you can be. I have a little slow graphics driver, so the fight sequences sometimes got a bit Guy-Ritchie-y, but it was still very enyoyable to kick the enemie's asses. Oh yeah, and playing with Catwoman (you can do that, duh) is pretty bad-ass too, it's good to be a little faster and more agile sometimes (and sexier). 

I don't think the story is a very important factor of the game, but it sure is one of the best things in Arkham City. It's so good, movies could be made after it, has a lot of unexpected twists and a pretty shocking ending, which sadly the marvellous world of the Internetz has spoiled for me before I even downloaded the game. With such a story the game really has a nice cinematic feel to it, as I really enyoyed watching the cutscenes, reading the character bios and basically understanding the whole story, that makes you feel even more like Batman, not just playing as Batman. The great original score makes the feeling even deeper, as it slightly resembles, betterly said references Hans Zimmer's soundtrack for the Nolan's Batman movies, but is still original and very good on its own.  Altough some people complained that there are too many villains in the game. I agree, that too many villains are not very good in movies (Batman & Robin), but in video-games...not as much. I actually liked the game much more because it featured so many majestic characters, backed up with excellent voice acting.

The story is also very well-made, as it lets a lot of different missions. There are some in which you fight, a few boss fights, some where you have to think and puzzle, some where you have to travel and explore the city, some where you have to go all CSI with the detective mode...My favourites are the stealth ones, where you have to go all Ninja Batman and throw a smoke pellet and the grap hook to escape then observe the situation, swing between vantage points and glide behing  the baddies to perform the silent takedown, rescuing the hostages or simply taking the bad guys out. They are hard, but enyoyable as hell. As I've said before, Ninja Batman is very bad-ass and people love being bad-ass. It's basically like seeing those  scenes from Batman Begins, when Batman goes to that port and hunts criminals for the first time and everyone's like "WHERE ARE YOU!!!", except from Batman's point of view. Pure awesomenes.

The game is also very vast – the world of Arkham City is big, the main story mode is long, there are also several side missions, Riddler's quests (you have to find all of the trophies scattered around the town, solve puzzles or even complete physical challenges, like gliding for over  100 metres and such), other hidden secrets and Easter Eggs to keep you entertained til' kingdom come.  It's also cool, that the Catwoman missions are a bit distanced from the main story, as you sometimes simply do what Catwoman wants to do and have a bit different point of wiew. You also have a game mode called »Riddler's Revenge«, which I first tought you had puzzles and stuff like that, but you actually have either fighting challenges either stealth missions. They are even harder as in the main story mode, but enyoyable as hell as Robin is a much bigger bad-ass then I tought he would be.  

Arkham City is also a sanctuary for Batman fans - you have character biographies, concept art, 3-D character models from The Earth One Batman to The Animated Nightwing  (you're even able to play with these in the Riddler's Revenge mode) and tons of unlockable stuff like that.  But now that we spent so much time praising the game, we have to move on to the bad stuff, as like 99 % of things, Batman: Arkham City isn't flawless.  Firstly, it has that really loud and kinda creepy Nvidia logo at the beginning. Secondly, Robin and Nightwing look a bit emo with that eyeshadow. But that's pretty much.  No, seriously, there is one thing that really, really bugged me and that is the glitch. Yup, there's a glitch and this isn't much of a spoiler - Somewhere in the first half of the game, after the Ra's Al Ghul boss fight, Ra's takes hostage of his daughter Talia and tries to convince Batman to kill him with the sword he is holding and lead the League of Assasins. Then Batman drops the sword on the floor, takes out the batarang and defeats Ra's, like a sneaky prick (just saying). But in many cases, he won't drop the sword. He just stands there like a fucking statue. Some people had to play with lower graphics, some retry a few times (meaning having to do the boss fight a few times) and some actually had to restart the game. But the good stuff is still simply so good, that the gkitches cannot hurt it. Therefore in conclusion, Batman: Arkham City is a great game, with great graphics, great gameplay, a great story, with great voice acting, great music and lots of great greatness.

Total rating: 10 / 10 

So what did you think about Batman: Arkham City? Did you like/dislike it, why? Which were your favourite missions/characters/parts of the game? Comment, below, let me know! Also, check out these amazing Arkham City trailers, here, here and here!

'The Hangover' movie review

It is now officially confirmed, I also review older movies. So anyways, The Hangover is a smash-hit 2009 comedy, directed by Todd Phillips, the director of comedies, mostly known for crude, sex-related jokes, like Old School, Roadtrip and School for Scoundrels. I have enyoyed those movies, but have also heard, that this was actually the film, that put Phillips on the map, as it made a shitload of money and was also surprisingly critically-acclaimed. Its reputation is big, so I had to watch it with very high expectations. But did it reach them?

The plot of The Hangover is about Doug (Justin Bartha) getting married and his best friends, Phil (Bradley Cooper) and Stu (Ed Helms) and his future wife's brother Alan (Zach Galifianakis) giving him a kick-ass bachelor party in Las Vegas. But things get out of control, as the three actual main characters wake up, finding a tiger in the bathroom, a baby in the closet, Stu missing a tooth and Doug missing. And now it's up to 'The Wolfpack' to find out, 'what the fuck happened last night', as it is illustrated several times in the film. Now first, The Hangover is a very funny movie and also pretty original. The humor isn't all as crude and inappropriate as you might think, but it still isn't for everyone and is Rated R for a reason (even tough it the rating basically precedes its target audience a bit). However you need more then just laugh-out-loud humor for a REALLY great comedy (the case of Ted, for an example).


And The Hangover has that. The three main characters are good and relatable, from the bad-ass Phil to the nerdy Stu imprisoned in his marriage and the straight-forward idiotic (but funny as hell, of course) Alan, and it works even better, because the actors are great. The story is actually very interesting and unpredictable and near the end of the movie, where question marks and mysteries of the last night's drunken misadventures keep showing up in chaotic and hilarious situations, you really start to feel for these guys. There are 5 hours til' the wedding, the groom is missing and you start to symphatize, understand and want them to suceed. So in conclusion, The Hangover met all of my high expectations, as I find the movie a fresh and incredibly funny comedy, with interesting, but relatable characters, a good story and good acting, deserving all the awards the movie has received, from the Golden Globe for Best Comedy or Musical to the MTV's Movie Award for Best WTF moment.


Total rating: 8.5 / 10

'Ted' movie review

This is just a teensy bit late, but I just saw one of the most succesful movies of the year and it would be weird  if I woudn't review it. So Ted probably doesn't need extra introduction: A little boy, named John with no friends wishes for his Christmas gift teddy bear to come to life and that really happens. The bear becomes his best friend, even in the next almost 30 years, as the little boy, (now Mark Wahlberg) still hangs out with him, even tough the bear also kinda grew up, as we all saw in the trailers and stuff like that (one of the posters is Ted and John urinating on the street, the other one Ted holding a sign with the R rating and all that MPAA crap on it), so we knew what movie we'll be watching. But things get complicated, when John's girlfriend Lori (Mila Kunis) wants a little bit less teddy bears in his life.

So the director of this movie is Seth MacFarlane, one of the most succesful TV-producers in the world, mostly cooperating on many cartoon series, but most known as the creator of Family Guy. I hope you know what that is, but in short: a very funny and harsh cartoon for adults. Now I only watched a few episodes of Family Guy and saw a few clips and there were pretty funny, but I'm not exactly a fan, since the show insulted a lot of stuff I like (what probably every human alive could say), but I knew what kind of humor would be in this movie. So yeah, it's not really for everyone. If you don't mind cussing every half of a sentence and a teddy bear having sex and getting high, you'll be okay.

The main question that many people asked themselves, before watching the movie is: Is it funny? And the answer is yes, it's VERY funny. That is the answer pretty much 80 % of the critics and masses, agreed to. The humor is mostly crude and harsh, filled with cussing, sex and pot jokes, but also has quite a few pop culture references and other types of humor. But it's all very funny. Of course, it's rated R, but I think the target audience is 14 - 25, so yeah. But anyways, as I've said, most critics agreed that it's funny, but they tought it was predictable and that you know, that the director is used to short stuff, as the movie is more of a collection of very funny scenes, weirdly put together.

I behalfly agree with that. Sure, the movie has a predictable ending and is no revolutionary, but Mark Wahlberg is pretty good as childish John and there's also a funny subplot, which wasn't revealed or mentioned in the trailers (and am I not going to reveal either), but I think it nicely connects to the main plot and all that stuff, so it all works out at the end. I also like how Lori puts the ultimat on her or Ted and naturally everyone would say Mila Kunis, but they succesfully made Ted one of those likeable characters, which you don't exactly want to hang out in real life, but still think he's insanely cool (or that he's got swag, depends on how much Ed Hardy stuff you own). So in conclusion, Ted might not be an excellent comedy with deep characters, an unpredictable story and Oscar-nomination-worthy acting, but nobody really expected that. We expected an excellent comedy in terms of laughter from the audience, and that is exactly what we got. 

Total rating: 7 / 10