Lists  Reviews  Images  Update feed
MoviesTV ShowsMusicBooksGamesDVDs/Blu-RayPeopleArt & DesignPlacesWeb TV & PodcastsToys & CollectiblesComic Book SeriesBeautyAnimals   View more categories »
Listal logo
All reviews - Movies (60) - TV Shows (13) - Books (15) - Games (3)

Could've been much worse

Posted : 6 years, 6 months ago on 27 February 2013 10:14 (A review of Blades of Glory (2007))

Blades of Glory is defiantly an acquired taste. Its jokes are nothing special, some are rather detestable and childish...which explains why Will Ferrell stars. Although I found some jokes quite funny, it wasn't to any high extreme...more like a little snigger, mainly because they're pretty nasty jokes because Heder looks like a girl...and so it's rather obvious what main jokes are going to be made. The main things I liked were probably that some of the jokes were quite funny, not as lame as I had anticipated. So, it's really down to what type of sense of humour you have, if you're the type of person that doesn't find 'Zoolander' funny, then chances are you won't find this funny. Now, what I disliked about it was the rather predictable plot, it's pretty obvious what happens in the end, in fact, it gets so predictable it gets very irritating. I also found the characters rather boring, they are defiantly some forgettable people.

The outline on the whole thing is about ice skating, but it's not anything to detailed in the sport as the two main characters can supposedly skate quite well in the beginning, so it doesn't follow how they want to be first class skaters. What instead it involves are two guys paired as partners when in every case it's always a male and female. So, the typical jokes that come with that include jokes about genitals, groin kicking and other various sexist jokes - which I didn't find particularly funny. Not my kind of 'humour'...if you can even call it that. Nothing really special happens, really, just a very typical 'comedy'. Absolutely no twist whatsoever, just as you'd expect from a Frat Pack film. It's just a couple of quick laughs, and that only depends on if you have a dry sense of humour. Even when something could possibly go wrong for any of the characters you just know it'll all turn out all right in the end, so really what's the point.

As for the acting, well it certainly isn't first-rate, as you'd probably have guessed. Though I'm not really an 'acting expert' I guess it was believable any how. It was Jenna Fischer as Katie that irritated me, she was very annoying, I didn't like that character or her acting. I think my favourite character was Will Ferrell's one, I think...no I'm pretty certain. It was between either a girly blonde pansy or a rude alcoholic slob.

The structure was very very predictable, defiantly. It's pretty obvious what's going to happen to any of them, in fact, I could actually just say how it turns out for all of them, you would probably have guessed it in the first 20 minutes of the film, that's what it was like for me anyway. It's just the unlikely happens, in most of these types of films that's how it turns out. If it didn't it would, I guess, at least got a rate of 7 instead of the usual 6, but seeing as how many people hate Will Ferrell, on here it's even managed to get to a 5, which I can not argue with.

Cinematography and lighting was well, nothing, I don't really care for these sorts of things in a film, if you thought it was good, then that's fine. I really couldn't care less about lighting etc. as long as it's not burning my eyes or it's to dark to see anything, then that's a big problem, but that wasn't the case.

The Music soundtrack wasn't really anything to great, to me. The song that immediately plays when the film starts is a very famous opera song "Time to Say Goodbye" which if you love that song don't get to excited as it's soon interrupted by the worthless plot. A song by Aerosmith is also played for about a minute, I'm sure you can guess what song it was, "I Don't Want to Miss a Thing" as that's probably the only bearable song they ever did. And then some rather cheesy songs. So, not really a spectacular soundtrack.

On a last say on this film, I don't think it's a terrible movie, almost a below average, it sure has its moments, but that all depends on your sense of humour and of course...your general opinions, likes and dislikes. If you detest Will Ferrell then obviously don't watch this, you don't get a medal for watching a film you already know you are not going to like. Personally I wouldn't recommend this film to anyone. It's not something I'd watch again if I could help it, but if someone asks me "was it a awful movie?" I shall say...no, it wasn't. The main reason to that is because it just wasn't as bad as Anchorman or Step-Brother, they have to be Will Ferrel's worst films. Heder's is Napolean Dynamite.

0 comments, Reply to this entry

Potter again...

Posted : 6 years, 7 months ago on 14 February 2013 09:29 (A review of Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire)

These Harry Potter films obviously have a cult following. And I can't say I really ever got into them. Very dull films to be honest.

The first one, I remember watching and it wasn't brilliant, really. Not scary or anything, a very mediocre film. The acting is way too cheesy as well. I also hate the fact that great actors like Richard Harris are only known for his brief appearance in the first two films. I gave the first film a rating of 4/10. The second, I gave a 4/10, again. But, this I am giving a 6/10, only though, because it is indeed an average film. There's a difference between dull and mediocre and average. This film's redeeming points were the tournament challenges, they were alright to watch, but nothing spectacular. The redeeming features of the first two, were obviously Richard Harris. I still wish he hadn't accepted, but he was threatened though.

Also, the mawkish prom bits were really just irritating, didn't like them at all. I think they should not have adapted these into a film series. It's clearly not very capable of proving that in can keep a variety of people interested. This is proof that not everything can be made into a film, and sometimes, should just be kept as a book, like it was originally.

0 comments, Reply to this entry

The Secret World of Arrietty (2010) review

Posted : 6 years, 7 months ago on 14 February 2013 06:46 (A review of The Secret World of Arrietty (2010))

Yet again Studio Ghibli only manages to impress me by what it looks like, not the story.

Before watching this I obviously read what it's about, as I could tell straight away it was clearly aimed at children, so I knew it wasn't going to be anything too deep. But what didn't get my expectations so high was the fact that it wasn't directed by Miyazaki, which was kind of a huge let down, but as I've followed the whole of Studio Ghiblis releases I wasn't going to miss this.

After, I was no way blown away, but, I still found it enjoyable, the amount of cruel/harsh films I've seen it's certainly nice to take a break and just watch a nice sweet happy film like this. It wasn't bad or anything, just it's aimed way to much at kids so most adults or older children wont get what they might have got before when watching a Ghibli movie.

Although it was fairly sad that one of the main characters in the movie had a life threatening illness, it still didn't manage to get me at all, but I bet it would the children, so there I rest my case.

0 comments, Reply to this entry

Pom Poko review

Posted : 6 years, 7 months ago on 13 February 2013 09:21 (A review of Pom Poko)

I think it had very pretty animations, just for the record I am a huge fan of Miyazaki and Studio Ghibli. So already I had high hopes for this film. And I must say it is no way one of Ghibli's best, and I think you may have guessed that by the IMBD mark maybe. But even if the any Ghibli movie PLOT doesn't appeal to you, you still have that beautiful animation with all sorts of amazing stories behind, so if Ghibli fails to grab you're attention with the plot, it will sure grab by its visual beauty, I mean this wasn't a bad movie or anything, just kind of average, but as I'm such a Studio Ghibli fan I loved pretty much anyway. But now just a bit on the plot, the characters and the situation; Well it's just really weird, I mean where'd the idea of shape shifting raccoons come from anyway!? That's just very very strange. It's also quite sad as the racoon's habitat is being destroyed by Japanese humans so, not very nice. Another you must must keep in mind is that Hayao Miyazaki actually didn't direct this movie, nor did his son, some guy named Isao Takahata did, he's apparently a long time friend of master Miyazaki. Anyway, what I mean is that everything Miyazaki himself directed churned out to be absolutely mind gripping and stunning visual beauty, and they are just two things you desperately need while watching anything; and that's what Studio Ghibli has.

I'd recommend this to anyone who is interested and loves or loved Studio Ghibli's work and if you are planning to watch the whole works of Ghibli, but do not, I repeat do NOT, expect any sort of masterpiece, in this case, I think it's for the visual beauty this time.

0 comments, Reply to this entry

*Batteries Not Included review

Posted : 6 years, 7 months ago on 13 February 2013 12:26 (A review of *Batteries Not Included)

No matter how much I try, I just cannot dislike this movie. I mean it's not a really bad film or anything, it's just not that great... average would be the word. It's a sweet film for families etc. but as I am such a callous person I didn't tend to look at that side of the movie. Instead I tried and looked at the plot, and well there isn't much of one to be honest really. I think it's just a movie for families, average, some may find it sweet, basically. But, I totally agree with the first review on this movie, that's the truth alright. But, I would easily understand why people would give this lower than a 6, I mean come on, it's the truth, robots only come to earth to save a building??!!...Yeah, that is quite true indeed. The film is a complete tine-passer, it's something you'd end up watching if your date never arrived, let's just put it that way.

Is it worth watching? erm, no, not really, but I guess if it was on television, then I guess it's sorta worth it. This film is kind of like a poor Steven Spielberg film, so only watch it when you bored out of your mind.

0 comments, Reply to this entry

The Dark Knight review

Posted : 6 years, 7 months ago on 12 February 2013 03:59 (A review of The Dark Knight)

Now I don't think anybody cares for what I think of this movie, maybe because I'm hated enough on here anyway .. and the fact that the reviewers that everyone loves have already reviewed this movie, *rolls eyes*. But, I would like to share my thoughts on this movie and everything about it.

Alot on here people say this movie is overrated; which I have to say, I think it sort of is, to be quite honest with you I don't think any Batman movie can be made into anything more than an enjoyable superhero movie or whatever, as this movie has been dubbed a "masterpiece", "one of the best movies ever made" and/or "the best film ever, literally". It's been called that alot. I don't think this is at all, I think it's highly enjoyable for Batman fans or DC fans etc. but as this has grabbed so much media attention more and more others have went to watch this movie; people who aren't even batman/DC fans, and yet they expect more than that..? For crying out loud it's a BATMAN movie, you are not going to get anything else. I am a fan of DC and Batman, I watch the animated tv series (the original), so I was bound to like it anyway, expect if it really was just plain crap, Y'know. Now on the actual thing it's self, I had only TWO problems with this movie, and that was; Batman's voice was very very annoying, really annoying. Two; The story was changed a hell of alot from the original, really was. And that's it for me. But you have to think, when you went to the cinema or put the disc in or whatever, are you actually a Batman fan?.

I believe that it's mark on IMDb is absolutely absurd. Yes, it was a fairly enjoyable movie for fans of Batman. But I do not think it should have that rating and this amount of praise. I think people should say; If you are actually a Batman fan, then you will love it.

Unfortunately this movie attracted attention from others, non-batman fans, and they were expecting more!? How stupid, it's a batman movie so you will get Batman, end of. But, I have to say, its mark on IMDb is silly. I think people should just say; it's a perfect film for batman lovers and nobody else.

Overall, it's a pretty good Superhero film for superhero fans, but I don't quite see what non-superhero fans will get out of this. Nolan may be a good director, but I believe he's twisted Batman perhaps a little too much, and still my favourite Batman film is the 1989 film starring Jack Nicholson as The Joker - he was simply the best Joker in my opinion and Tim Burton easily made the Best Batman films, and Michael Keaton is the Best Batman there has ever been. Oh, and Bales voice for Batman, was extremely irritating and just awful. Ledger did pretty well too, it's a shame he's only famous for this role only, he could have gone far with his career tied with his talent, shame.

0 comments, Reply to this entry

South Park review

Posted : 6 years, 7 months ago on 10 February 2013 06:54 (A review of South Park)

I Never did get the funny side of this show, I mean it has its moments and that but, I wouldn't say it was hilarious, I don't think they go out of there way to be rude, I think they just stereotype, and that's another thing I never found particularly funny either, well in some cases I do. Defiantly not going to lie. But when South Park do it, I don't know, nothing that appeals to me. I think people only say they like this mainly because it 'tackles' politics and is oh so very very slightly racist sometimes, hardly if you ask me. I gave this whole show 4, and I think as time goes by I will quite happily give it a lower mark. Honestly guys it's not that funny. I'd much rather watch the early Simpsons episodes, because the new ones are total crap. But, this has always been that. It's overrated and not even that funny, just rude for the sake of it. Slightly abysmal. I'll always think this show is overhyped bull crap. Put your eyes on something that deserves more attention.

0 comments, Reply to this entry

Fanny and Alexander (1982) review

Posted : 6 years, 7 months ago on 10 February 2013 12:01 (A review of Fanny and Alexander (1982))

This is now my fourth Ingmar Bergman film I have watched, I think this will be my last, as I have not become a fan of Bergman's work at all. This movie is how I expected it be be- Dull, Boring and very very off-putting. Well that's just one way of saying it. It still wasn't as bad as 'Persona', although not far off. First it already started off by having something I absolutely dread in a movie; A play, which went on exceedingly long for me, I was already half asleep, then when I semi woke up I had something even worse come after; a long long boring, tedious talk, which seems to be Mr. Bergmans way of showing his mark, which shows pretty much why I dislike his movies. I mean I guess the house was rather pretty and nice, but, it did not help that going on inside the house was boredom and silliness, and when it wasn't that, we had dullness.

Oh, and Bergman treated us to his "Oh, so unique skill of camera work", ehem' ehem', so basically it's Godard all over again, anyway, if you didn't like his other films dont bother with this- Simple as.

0 comments, Reply to this entry

The most pretentious film ever made...

Posted : 6 years, 7 months ago on 9 February 2013 11:03 (A review of 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968))

2001: A Space Odyssey is incredible mess of movie, the writers Stanley Kubrick and Arthur C. Clarke obviously felt that a lot of random uninteresting long scenes make a whole film. It has a plot which doesn't go anywhere: In the opening scene monkeys learn the use of the bone as a weapon, it then suddenly cuts to a man on a spaceship who we follow for about an hour and then disappears totally from the film. However the middle part the film gets more interesting as we follow a different character who is held captive by a crazy machine called HAL, but that story slowly becomes more incomprehensible and uninteresting and we are introduced to the giant space baby. In conclusion, the film goes absolutely nowhere. The film is only worth it for the brilliant special effects (the spaceships look really real, as opposed to nowadays CGI) and the one hour HAL segment.

This film gives the pretence of saying something profound or deep but does not. Just because a film doesn't make sense or we don't understand what is happening, it doesn't make it a classic. All this film does is be pretentious: a giant space baby is shown and we're supposed to be awed and thought provoked, a monolith appears a few times and we're supposed to say "what does mean?" or "I don't understand it must be intelligent!" none of it means anything. There's a difference when a film genuinely has something to say or a message and when it likes to pretend it does, 2001 A Space Odyssey pretends it does with it's long-winded running time that boasts grandiose music and a long tedious scenes yet if you love style over substance or films that have no intelligence yet fool the audience into believing they do (Shawshank Redemption) then this film certainly is for you; yet if you want an intelligent plot- based film avoid this pretentious mess and you'll save 2hrs and half of your life; spend it on a Kubrick film that deserves the praise: "Paths of Glory" "The Killing" "Barry Lyndon" or "Dr Strangelove."

1 comments, Reply to this entry


Posted : 6 years, 7 months ago on 9 February 2013 09:39 (A review of The Naked Gun: From the Files of Police Squad! (1988))

Oh my, where do I start with this film. Okay, when I was first introduced to this film, I thought a "typical police spoof", which yeah...it was, but it was actually funny, and I laughed like hell throughout it, and that's all I ask in a comedy; to do what it promises. At the time, I hadn't seen Police Squad the television series, well, I wish I had. I wish I'd have found this entertaining film and the series years before, but I guess all in good time, it seems.

Leslie Nielson plays the hilarious, danger-prone Lieutenant Frank Drebin, he does a spectacular job at doing so. He is indeed the best character, which is exactly the reason he is the main one. After watching this, I knew Nielson was indeed another king of comedy, some may say he is the king of spoofs, but as I really am not that keen on most of them, I much prefer to call him one of the Kings of comedy, he sure deserves a spot there, that's for sure.

Yes, there is a few sex jokes etc. and although I detest that and find it very boring, the rest of the film which was utterly entertaining, made up for all that, but I'm sure some simple-minded adults would enjoy that stuff, I guess.

Overall, I was throughout entertained. I've watched this over 5 times, and would quite happily watch it again. If you hate spoofs, fine, but just bash one which deserves bashing and it certainly isn't this marvellous trilogy.

1 comments, Reply to this entry