fluturoj Reviews

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)

Great story development

[7/10 · 14 May 2017]

Real-life link: Surprisingly, I can't think of anything that during the movie made me think 'Hmm would be good to remember this if I get into similar situations'. So no real life links from this one that I can take away.

Plausibility: a bit low on this category as well. I find it a bit implausible that a young and inexperienced hobbit would volunteer to go to one of the most frightening places when even the most braves leaders of all middle earth refuse to go. I also find it a bit implausible Froddos friends would volunteer to go with him to these dangerous places given that the movie does not provide any reason for us to believe that their friendship is that strong.

Storytelling: this is the strength of the movie. You won't get bored watching this. The story moves fast and progresses so gratefully. One event leads to the other in a great manner.

Character development: Characters are also another strength of the movie. They all embark a development joinery. We are given enough background of the main ones so that it makes us curious to see how they will develop and act when they are confronted with difficult decisions and events.

Overall, great development of story and an interesting movie.

Predestination (I) (2014)

Interesting and confusing which makes it worth the watch

[6/10 · 14 May 2017]

Real-life link: you need a purpose in life.

Plausibility: this is not the aim of the movie so it should not be too much of a concern. The whole idea of time travel is implausible at the moment. However, in terms of plausibility of action and reactions to those actions, the movie does quite well. People can do whatever it takes to give themselves a purpose. Again, it all comes down to emotions.

Storytelling: very good storytelling method. Moves very fast and reveals the events in a very interesting way that keeps you wondering and wanting to know more.

Character development: There is one main character that comes during different stages of his/ her life. You understand the reasons behind all her/his actions and that makes the character deep and understood.

Casting: Great leads and great acting. Very fit for the role.

Overall, it is interesting and confusing which makes it worth the watch.

Third Person (2013)

Confusing in terms of what was real and what was not

[5/10 · 13 May 2017]

Enigmatic and confusing.

Real-life link: when you are the 'other' you are always the other. There is a reason why you are not official its that bond that leads to marriage that is missing. Being attractive helps, not beautiful but attractive. Emotions are behind every action and every reason.

Plausibility: all good. Jealous ex, jealous other. All real life situations that can happen. The only implausible one is the one where a men is ready to pat thousands of dollars for a stranger.

Storytelling: very confusing. I personally believe that non of those tales were real and that they only existed in the writers mind. The writer lived through them. None of that was real. If that is not the case then the storytelling is quite boring since you have separate tales that do not link to each other. If it was not all in the writers head then the locations were also all pretty mixed up.

Casting: great actors and fit for their roles. Good acting as a result and good chemistry between the actors.

In general, a good movie. Just confusing in terms of what was real and what not.

Central Intelligence (2016)

A warm movie with a good message trying to fight bullying that makes you laugh.

[5/10 · 18 April 2017]

Real-life lesson: You never know how long something you do or say to someone stays with that person. Being horrible to someone in high school can affect them through out their life. And you don't know how obsessed someone can become with you, you might not realise the impact you leave on people.

Plausibility: The aim of this movie is not to be plausible so let's not get into it. Bullying affects people, that is plausible so let's leave it with that. Also overliking the only person that has shown kindness to you also is plausible.

Storytelling: Slow at the beginning but takes off well. Has its interesting moments when you don't know if Bob is a good or a bad guy.

Character development: Jet is the only one that develops a bit realising that his life is not a failure. We already know what motives Bob and what has affected him and make him who he is so much character development is not needed.

Acting/Casting: Both are amazing and have an amazing chemistry. At the beginning I feel like the rock had a bit trouble portraying this goofy warm hearted kid even after 20 years but it gets better towards the end.

Overall, a warm movie with a good message trying to fight bullying that makes you laugh.

Drive (I) (2011)

Good action movie with some good points that make you think but lacks character depth.

[6/10 · 17 April 2017]

Real- life lesson: Get yourself away from dangerous men. Irene and most importantly her son were at risk for life and violence because they were the family of a criminal and same story again when they became the most important things to the driver which again is a criminal. Stay away from criminals because sooner or later you'll end dead like Shannon did or you'll be the target of their anger like Cook was. And lastly, even if you are a mafia like Nino you can't be protected 24 hours and enemies will find you and kill you. Even if you are a mafia like Nino you are no more then a human being when your arms and troops are no where to be seen.

Plausibility: good. Only good because we don't know anything about the driver to judge if he could actually be that good and fearless. Plausible that a mafia can be beaten by a single man if this men waits for the right moments and circumstances.

Storytelling: a bit slow at the beginning but takes off very well after the robbery. Everything connects very well and has its interesting moments. Something that is done excellently when the story is told is how they show as that the driver is good at not blinking for a long time, then they show us that Bernie is very good in killing with one stab so then when Bernie stabs the driver and he does not blink we don't know if its because he is good at not blinking or because he is dead. A powerful scene that have never seen before (or at least don't remember). The ending is an enigma too. The driver is not home when Irene knocks on his door which makes you think did he drive away for good or was he coming back?

Character development: poor. The driver does not develop a bit. We don't know why he is so good at driving, we don't know why he gets involved in robbery, we don't know any of his motives. All we know is that he cares about Irene and Shannon and the kid. We don't know why he is so cold and why he kills so merciless.

Acting/ Casting: Ryan Gosling is great. Makes you like a cold character, a criminal. Carey Mulligan is also good as Irene. The chemistry between Ryan and Carey is great and makes you like the couple.

Overall, a good action movie with some good points that make you think but lacks character depth.

Memoirs of a Geisha (2005)

It lacked the emotion that makes the story of the Geisha so great.

[6/10 · 17 April 2017]

I have read the book and as such I was very excited to watch the movie. Given that Les Miserables and Great Gatsby were amazing adaptions of the book I was expecting something similar from this one but was I wrong. The main problem with this adoption is that it lacks the emotion with which Geisha tells the story. She hates it, finds this whole world bizarre but in the movie we do not see it. It is shown as something she finds normal and adapts to it. There is emotion of dislike towards geishas expressed. Maybe the creators were being careful not to insult the culture but without that emotion and Chiyos attitude towards Geishas, the movie looses that what made the book so great.

Real-life link: if you are not a modern undefended woman, you fate depends on others and sadly mainly rich man.

Plausibility: A 14 year old falls for an older men because the men shows him kindness but why would an old men like the Chairmen fall for a kid so that he sends Mameha to help her become a geisha without being a pedo? There is something shady here that does not fit. But that has more to do with the book then the movie.

Storytelling: Follows the book nicely, with the exception that it leaves out the reason why the father sells the girls and that it ends quickly without telling that the chairmen and Chiyo get together and have kids and she moves the states.

Casting/ Acting: I liked the fact that the actors were not Westerns but what bugged me a bit was their accent, why would you not cast American actors with the same background to get rid of the accent?

Overall, it lacked the emotion that makes the story of the Geisha so great.

Doctor Strange (2016)

The worse movie in the series so far because it wants you to believe that magic on earth is the most natural thing and every human being is cable of practising it.

[5/10 · 16 April 2017]

One major problem with this film: why is your world plausible and what makes Doctor Strange the chosen one. Are you telling me that everyone that walked in that temple could have learned magic like that? Captain America and Hulk are products of science, Iron Man of Money, Thor of his alieness and goddess but what about Doctor Strange? He is suborn, arrogant and ambitious and that's why he is the chosen one? Well so are at least 5 million other people in planet earth. The magic had no back up here, its Earth why should there be magic? Are you expected to be childish and believe it just like that? Nope.

Real-life link: Everyone has a reason for his/her action. Kaecilius believes he is saving the world because he has been lied by his teacher. Of course he is going to question everything she has taught him. Trust was betrayed. A villain with not a villain aim, just a greedy one.

Plausibility: The worse part of this movie. For a movie like this it is crucial that you back up your fantasy world. Why is magic possible on Earth? Every normal human being can practice magic if it enters that temple now and can see the spirit out of body? This is just ridiculous. The worse part was when Strange's spirit talks to Christine like it is the most natural thing ever for humans. Hated that. If that magic was possible because of the infinity stone that would make the movie awesome but no, it just expects us to believe that every human can do magic and magic is the most natural thing on earth.

Villain: Strong. Double Villain. The former student turned bad and the overall villain of all the Marvel Movies. They can't beat either of them and that is what makes them strong. Kaecilius could only be beaten because Dormammu takes him and Dormammu can not be beaten at all, he only accepts a deal that sets him free and that's how the earth is saved.

Storytelling: Strong. Keeps you interested. Starts with the life of Strange, the accident and his pursue to get his old life back. He learning magic seems a bit rushed (he is a natural dah) but the end is unpredictable and surprises you, you don't know how they will safe the earth. A great surprise is to learn that Kaecilius was actually right and the perfect accent one is not so perfect since she draws energy from the dark dimension, the same dimension she fights.

Character development: Strange learns that there are many ways to safe the world. At the end of the day he looses nothing. All the control he had as being the best doctor, that is not multiplied by millions since he is now saving the world. Arrogance still there I'd say.

Acting/Casting: Benedict Cumberbatch is an excellent choice. Makes an arrogant character likable.

Overall, the worse Marvel movie so far, not because of its story or characters but because it wants you to believe that magic on earth is the most natural thing and every human being is cable of practising it.

Keeping Up with the Joneses (2016)

It is entertaining and occasionally makes you laugh but it has absolutely no quality to it.

[4/10 · 16 April 2017]

Rea life link: none. Nothing in this movie makes you think 'ah actually that could be true and I better remember that'

Plausibility: Not good at all. No couple is as perfect as the Joneses and and no couple is as cringy as the other couple. The friendship that they develop is unlikely, a couple can not become a spy overnight.

Villain: Weak and implausible. The dealer is an old employee of the company that Jeff knew? Many questions. How did he become the the head of the Scorpion if he was so unimportant? Is it that easy to become the lead of such a dangerous group?

Storytelling: Basically you know the movie from the trailer. No surprises and very predictable. The bug enigma should be who the Joneses are and we know from the beginning they are spies, well from the trailer. Nothing interesting there.

Character development: The only character that shows a bit of further grow is Tim's when he admits that he does not like his job but nothing more to it. And what's the point of admitting it if you will continue doing the same job regardless?

Acting/Casting: No chemistry between the Joneses. I know Gal was supposed to portray this strong cold woman and she does indeed but leaves you wondering what the hack is Tim doing with her then? Mr and Mrs Smith anyone? That is the chemistry you would be looking for. Again with the Gaffneys, no chemistry. They come across as children. I know Zach Galifianakis was supposed to make the movie funny but it just made it cring.

Overall, It is entertaining and occasionally makes you laugh but it has absolutely no quality to it.

V for Vendetta (2005)

Old story. Government gone evil and a hero that wants to save the nation from ti-just that the hero is not heroic but rather vindictive.

[5/10 · 16 April 2017]

Real life lessons: I know this is supposed to be profound and make you reflect on life quite a lot but I must say I did not encounter a moment in this movie that made me think " I better remember that'.

Plausibility: Weakish. The idea that a biologically created monster seeks revenge is OK and that the government created a virus to tyronise its nation but how come a single person with a mask on a TV convinces all those people to go to parliament square and face their death in attempt to change something. Can that be done is a year? By a person who no one knows who he is? Would a father and a mother risk the safety of their family just because a masked man on telly tells them to do so? Don't really think so. What safes the movie a bit is the scene when a finger men kills a child for wearing the mask. That is something that would make a nation revolt if it is already poked. So a medium plausibility here.

Villain: The government, a dictator. This could have been strange and the supreme chancellor appearing only on a screen makes him seem as powerful, unreachable. But he is easily beaten when his security betrays him and brings him to V and that is the worse way to totally weaken the villain in a movie. If your villain is strong it should not be beaten so easily.

Storytelling: Starts well. Tells the story of Evey first then that of Vendetta. Then moves to the story beyond them that concerns them all and the common villain that needs to be beaten and this all occurs within one year which is clearly stated in the beginning of the movie. Two problems with this movie: they mention that all the events in the movie connect but I did not see that happening. And second, you know that the big event is going to happen on the 5th of November 1 year from the first year in the movie. It starts amazing with interesting scene when the old baily is blown up but the ending was not good, you would expect exactly that ending. Envey falling in love with V is expected but makes no sense, they never had a connection.

Character development: the stronger development here is without no doubt that of Envey. She beats her fear and takes leadership at the end. Vendetta seeks revenge and never do you see him reflecting if he is indeed doing the right thing. I mean killing people like the doctor at the end even though she confess she had no idea what was going on. She said 'I hoped to change the world; and he replies 'I have not come here for what you hoped to do but for what you did' That my friend is monstrous and has no regards of others feelings and motives. Stop and think V for once, stop and think.

Acting/Casting: I can only say one thing here-Natalie Portman is brilliant.

Overall, it is an old story. Government gone evil and a hero that wants to save the nation from ti- just that the hero is not heroic but rather vindictive.

Why Him? (2016)

Funny

[6/10 · 14 April 2017]

Just another movie showing how money rules.

Real-life connection: Older rich guy gets younger beautiful girl-dad gets angry for all the right reasons like risking your future to depend on your boyfriend and all the romantic gestures are made possible because there is enough money to sponsor them.

Acting: both leads are great. Dad is absolutely amazing. The chemistry between Steph and James' character is not the best but she is exactly the kind of girl look wise that a guy like James' character could fall for.

Ending: it is what ruins the movie. Scotts business idea is not good at all, Steph decides to do what dad wants and a successful tech entrepreneurs still sticks around like he has no choice and takes whatever Steph demands.

Overall a good movie, cringy at times but it sure has its funny moments.

Mike and Dave Need Wedding Dates (2016)

Entertaining

[7/10 · 9 April 2017]

No depth to it but quite entertaining and gives you a few laughs.

Real-life link: There is one instance where the events in this movie imitate those of real life: that you got to act to get what you want. To explain, the girls made the trip to Hawaii possible because they took action that had that consequence. The presented themselves so that they would fit what the boys were looking for even though that was not their true self and the created the circumstance where they would notice them (being hit by the car). They created the circumstances that were beneficial for them. All the other events on the movie are Hioliwoodised and have little possibility of happening, they are exaggerated for entertainment purposes and it works because the movie is quite entertaining.

Storyline: Flows nicely. Th events lead nicely to one another, no boredom is created and the story moves fast. The story in build on characters underlying development rather then on the superficial events. Everything that happens is as a result of character development which is something not many movies can achieve. Overall a good movie.

Welcome to the Jungle (I) (2013)

Enjoyable

[4/10 · 14 January 2017]

The real-life link: The approach to how a relationship works. Lisa refused Phil because he was too direct when he told her he liked her. He was too direct because he was quite confident and did not care much of what she thought. He went after what he wanted directly. Did not leave time to for Lisa to develop any emotional attachment to him, he did not wait for the situations where they know each other more to happen and assumed a moment they shared at the airplane was enough for him to make the next move. Chris on the other hand, had a crush on Lisa but he did not make a move until he got confirmation that Lisa liked him as well. Lisa liked him when the circumstances put them in a position where she got the change to know him better. But at the end, no matter how much Lisa liked Chris things did not move to more until Chris did the first move, making Chris here the one who determined if they are going to be in a relationship or not. I have a problem with that. Movies like this give the impression that men are always the ones expected to make the first move and therefore in the real world if a woman makes the first move it is considered weird and usually freezes everything that was going on. This makes the men the one who always determines if two people are going to be in a relationship or not.

Plausibility: plausibility is a joke. First, Chris would be happy to go on a trip with Lisa rather than hating the trip because Phil was going to be there. Phil would never not leave the island in the end and he would be more reasonable in the tragic situation than he was.

Storytelling: well done. The story is developed in an interesting way that does not bore you.

The movie is however enjoyable with scenes that make you laugh and with a plot that is not so easily predictable.

Neighbors 2: Sorority Rising (2016)

Funny

[6/10 · 5 January 2017]

A bit of sexist movie but this time against men. I did not like that.

The real-life link: makes you reflect how people grow up and get their own life. What one used to be our bonds with friends fade and the only strong and important relationship remains your so and family.

The storyline: very good. Difficult to predict, get the interest, evolved fast and has good action scenes. The final was however a bit disappointing since it was very similar to the first one and everything seemed to sort out from itself.

Plausibility: not so great. As I said everything seemed to get to its place in the end which is not always the case. A happy ending, an implausible happy ending is not a good ending for a film of the 21st century.

Character development: We see Zac's character facing dilemma and evolve. He becomes s locale character and you can relate to that.

It has good jokes and it puts a lot of emphasis against sexism when it comes to females, however a step backwards for male sexism.

The Legend of Tarzan (2016)

Slow

[6/10 · 4 January 2017]

It felt like watching a cartoon come to live in the big screen.

Real-life link: How to act to get your job done. George Washington Williams's desired outcome was to get evidence that Congo is being enslaved and save them his motive being his conscious clearness for having helped against indians. What he needed was Tarzan. The action he first did was try to convince him like the other in the room without revealing his intention. This did not work, that's why he told Tarzan his true aim for wanting to go to Africa. That worked.

Plausibility: it's Tarzan. One thing however, that added to the implausibility is how lucky Williams was in landing on that train that had all the evidence.

Storytelling: I felt that the movie was very strong when it came to slow motion scenes, epic moves but the action part was not equality strong. I felt the movie moved to slow and the story evolved more based on those slow motion scenes than on solid action. Slow motion scenes are appreciated after a long action scenes, they are like the pauses in a powerful speech. The one without the other just loses value.

Characters: Tarzan, it was said about him that he had wildness in him, he never showed that so I never believed that for a second. Jane, little background to her story so it was not easy to understand her or to see any sort of development. George Washington Williams was the character to develop the most. He had a plan and through the film we find out his motives that make us sympathise with him.

Acting:Alexander Skarsgård was a poor choice for Tarzan. He never captures the audience, he failed to portray a lovable character. He just did not sell Tarzan or his legend.

Bad Moms (2016)

Exaggerated

[4/10 · 29 December 2016]

How old was the person who wrote the storyline?12? Because it felt like this person had no idea how life works and seems to believe that everything come your way perfectly.

Real-life link: nothing to reflect upon, everyone knows that moms would do almost everything when it comes to their kids. The movie gives nothing more beyond this idea. Everyone is a bad mom? Depends what you call "bad". It seemed like this movie called imperfection bad. It is not being a bad mom if you don't do your kids homework or you don't cook them breakfast. That's pretty normal, in fact doing those things is being a bad mom. Let your kid grow. And were they serious when the kids left Mila because she stopped spoiling them? So now kids, blackmail moms so that they become perfect? Oh and also, in the end the Gwendolyn becomes their friend because she has a private plane. Friendship can be bought so easily, seriously?

Plausibility: Zero. Life is not as superficial and easy as this movie shows. You husband cheats on you? Great, I never loved him anyway and now lets go to therapist have a minor discussion in front of her so that she can conform that no way in this earth can our marriage be saved. Oh and also there is this hot single father that waits just around the corner for you when you leave your husband. And many many other ideas like that like the one when you get people to come to your party just because you send a text of you drinking wine or your husband suddenly obeys you just because you yell at him on the phone that you are going with friends to a school meeting.

Character development: Gwendolyn is the only character that shows some growth, other just became more annoying.

Acting: Mila is extremely bad. The scene when the coffee gets all over her, I could practically see her laughing. Why did she have the lead? Kristen Bell is a thousand times better.

So many things wrong with this mainly because it simplifies life so much, there are scenes however that make you laugh and if you just want to kill some hours and have a laugh or too and need that switch off from reality wishing that things could be simpler, than this movie is for you.

The Night Before (II) (2015)

Diffusive

[4/10 · 27 December 2016]

The real-life link: the obvious-even the best friends can not take care of you forever because they too have their own lives. It makes you think how unless you have a partner that cares for you, no one else that is not family will never become family. People get shown this often that sparkly why people rush into relationships as long as it is a relationship. But is that true? Is it true that when your family is gone, unless you have a girlfriend/boyfriends wife/husband no one will ever become your family?

Plausibility: poor. When you loose your family, two friends showing by your door will not make you totally forget what happened. This movies seems to believe that they do.

Character development: we do see growth. We see Ethan realising that he needs to accept change and its fears in order to be able to grow. We see him and the others realising that things will inevitably change and that change needs to be accepted. Diana is a character I liked. She knew that Ethan proposing to her was on pure intentions, he just wanted to escape the fear of abandonment, she knew that he still had not reflected on what was the actual reason why she did not want to be with him. She knew she wanted commitment and hope for a future, family. She realised that she won't get that from Ethan until he accepted that change was necessary and that he wanted that change. She did not get back with him until he understood that. That is a strong character.

Storytelling: poor. The story moves slow and as much as the nutcracker party tries to steer the movie in one direction, the story lie falls apart and in some instances even becomes boring. Not to mention some Christmas clichés that the movie has.

The Purge: Election Year (2016)

Disturbing

[5/10 · 26 December 2016]

Predictable and similar to the second part.

Real-life link: Poor in this front. Does not give you much to reflect and think. I would say that the movie tried to touch the idea that humans are quite dark from the inside but I don't think it does a good job. The movie portrays humans as black and white, not grey as many would say.

Plausibility: let's not talk about this. Being plausible was not this movies aim therefore its not its weakness. It is implausible that a single man can survive the purge almost by himself twice and beat the government forces twice. The perfect timing of rescues are also quite implausible but as I said let's not talk about this.

Character development is poor since they don't go deeper than what is initially shown.

This movie is dark It has a lot of scenes that are quite disturbing even for the purge. As as I said, walking down the streets on purge night is nothing new. We have seen all that in the second part. A new idea and a new scene was needed.

Suicide Squad (2016)

Surprisingly-romantic

[6/10 · 26 December 2016]

It was a surprise to me how much this movie was based on romance and on true mad love. I'll get to that later but as I said, I would have not expected a movie like this to be based on romance which I am not saying is bad thing, just that surprising which kind of makes the movie warm and stand out.

The real-life link: let's get back to this idea of romance in the movie. Is there a love so strong that one would risk fighting a witch and see the end of the world just to save the other half, like Lieutenant GQ Edwards did for June Moone? Or is there a love so strong like Harley Quinn's love for the Joker so that one would go insane, get rid of humanity and sanity just to be accepted from the one one loves? Is there a love this strong in real life?

The storytelling: Great. An interesting beginning by which all the characters are introduced. An enemy that makes the interesting idea come alive, a setback that prepares you for the grand finale and the grand finale. The story moves fast, is interesting and leaves no space for boredom.

The character development: poor. The only character that shows a slight development is that of Headshot but considering that he was never the bad guy, the softness in him due to his daughter and his leadership do not come as a surprise, are bot touching and do not go far. With joker's believed death, there was space for Harley Quinn's character to develop-either become better or worse. How is it plausible that someone who loves so much as Harley does, is so less affected by the death of the one she loves. I think the movie tried to save El Diablo as the one character who develops in the end and touches the audience-poorly done since his story was exactly as expected. One major factor when it comes to characters is how there was no reasonable situation that created a bond between the squad. There was nothing that made the squad a team and yet someone how in the end they became friends. Why?

In general an interesting action movie, but it does not go beyond that.

Money Monster (2016)

Interesting

[6/10 · 25 December 2016]

I liked this movie. I liked that is tried to have twists and not be predictable.

The real-life connection: As such as this movie tried to represent the real life I don't think it did it very well. For example, when they bring Kyle's girlfriend in, how believable it is that when a person sees the father of her son, in a hostage situation, starts provoking him even further? Would one not stop and think that she is putting everyone else in danger including the father to be of her child? I can only explain that with the suggestion that she lost her calm and ability to think clearly when she learned that the only money that would secure her future is gone. If someone pregnant with intensified feelings, adding to that the fear and uncertainty of becoming a mother for the fist time, it can be plausible that would react in the same way that Kyle's girlfriend did. So, I take it back. This movie actually does quite a good job in reflecting real life when it comes to this example. That scene not only makes the movie realistic but also gives it a twist since I did not except that reaction.

What I did expect was that Lee will help Kyle. I expected that he will feel for the situation and do the right thing.

The development of the story was good as well. The movie moves fast and you don't find your self bored because the movie is stuck in one scene. Getting out of the studio was a bit delayed but I am happy it happened in the end because otherwise the movie would not seem as a movie but rather as a show.

Acting, great. George Clooney makes the character lovable and funny which is great to watch. Jack O'Connell-also great. Given that I had never heard about him before, I was positively surprised with his performance.

Love the Coopers (2015)

Disappointing

[3/10 · 25 December 2016]

This is one of the worst Christmas movies I have ever seen. It perplexes me why a great cast of a great calibre would accept to participate in a movie like that.

The movie has no clear story line. It is predictable and it is quite cringy.

Usually, I write the reviews immediately after I watch a movie but in this case some days have past so I am therefore unable to comment in detail and the things that I especially did not like. But, I know that I expected a great Christmas movie and was let down.

The energies of characters do not fit with one another. It is a strange connection between characters so the connection feels weird and forced.

I would not recommend this movie to anyone who expects an enjoyable Christmas movie.

American Hustle (2013)

Eye-opening

[6/10 · 4 September 2016]

I found the movie to be a very good reflection of real life in terms of complexity of personalities.

The real-life lessons: don't ever believe someone so easily just because they say so. It it incredible how fast characters in this movie believed the others just because they said so. They believed false characters as for example they believed the actor was the lawyer or the sheikh just because someone said they are. They believed someone had connections to London just because they said they did. They believed someone was telling the truth about an investment opportunity just because they said they knew someone in their neighbourhood. We, in real life also do this every single day. It is quite frightening to see how easily we could be scared, lied, investigated. It reminds you that there are people out there that know this and take advantage of your trust. It is very easy to say to someone I am this and this person. If you do it, they can't easily verify that and if they do it you can't verify that. Another thing, don't touch crime. If you don't touch it you don't leave evidence no matter what you say. An example that actions speak louder than words even when it comes to justice processes (even though you get sentences even for just speaking as we saw). And finally, the small fishes are always the first to be caught and the first to go and sometimes the only ones. And also Richie DiMaso's failed attempt to get on papers and be huge shows that when you get blinded by goal so that you become cruel (blackmailing people into working for you, beating your boss) to achieve it, you get humbly reminded by karma that that is not the way to get it

Character development: amazed. The characters are externally strong all grey not just white or black with the exception of the mayor that came across as so innocent and white that was ready to commit crimes so that his community develops.

Furious 7 (2015)

Emotional

[6/10 · 2 September 2016]

Being a fan of Paul, the end was quite emotional and touching and I must say they have done an amazing job of not letting his absence be felt in the movie. A goodbye well done and well handled.

In general now I expected more from the movie. The only thing that I like about it was the storyline and telling. It has a great development of events so hats off to the writers. Characters however, are not done so great. They lack depth or character dilemmas. I think Deckard Shaw will develop more in the next part so maybe thats why in this one it was so hallow.

Some of the fight scenes were done great such as that between Toretto and Shaw in the end, and some were done poorly like the fighting scene at the beginning between Toretto and Hobbs.

I felt that the tried too hard to make it 'cool' and used too many 'catch' phrases in the attempt. They said out loud what should have been implied and left to said in the minds of the audience. When you do that you risk in not showing the audience what you want but telling them which is always poor.

There were scenes that just are cringy and don't make sense like Toretto waking up from the dead just because Letty says she remembers everything. Or that Ramsey will help them without thinking twice. Because they are loyal to each other? What if they were loyal but used all the good that comes with that for evil reasons? She has no motive to believe or help them at all. And while we are talking about her who is she? All we know about her is that she is good with computers. The shallowest character I have ever seen.

So a lot of things that I dint like but it has a solid story (a substory wishing a greater story) which I liked and which made the movie interesting enough. Some of the action scenes were also well done that make the movie quite enjoyable.

Edge of Tomorrow (2014)

Interesting

[7/10 · 1 September 2016]

One thing first: how did Rita know that if you get blood into your veins you will loose the power, I mean shouldn't she have died and not woken up again to realise that? How did she know? Other than this the movie was great.

Real-life lessons:poor in this regard. The only think that I could pick up is that practice makes you great whatever that is. Everything can be mastered when practised and once you get used to the idea. Cage, a hysterical coward scared of war, becomes the best soldier because he trains everyday and goes through the experience a lot of times.

Plausibility: I liked that they implied that Rita had become the angel of that previous battle because she had the power to reset the day. She was great because she got to the same thing over and over again so a lot of practice. A kind of cheating method, she wasn't this born great warrior. She became this warrior because she could rest time and do the same things hundreds of times. This gives it great points to plausibility.

Character development: Cage develops slightly but i think it could have gone further and the same with Rita. We don't know Rita's motives for volunteering and we know very little about her.

Acting/ Casting: both leads are great. I was pleasantly surprised by Emily Blunt.

Storytelling: Brilliantly done. It makes the movie very interesting. I loved how some scenes were happening for the fist time and some had happened a hundred times before maybe but you just never knew which was which. Twists and surprises in the storyline were also done great. Humour mainly in Cage's character at the beginning was amusing and done to the right extent.

Overall, great movie.

Captain America: Civil War (2016)

Great

[7/10 · 31 August 2016]

The movie is awesome. I enjoyed it very much and liked it a lot.

At the beginning having just watched Batman v Superman I thought that the idea that the superhero should be held accountable for the consequences of their fights on innocent people to be similar to that of Batman v Superman but unlike Batman v Superman this movie developed and brings this dilemma to new level. The title civil war is made justice three times. First, when the war stays between humans and superhero (no aliens or infinity stones). Secondly, during the epic fight between all the avengers on the airport and finally between Tony and Steve (epic ending).

The fight scenes are incredible, fast and just great. When Winter Solder steals a driving motorcycle and possesses it in the air that was one of the wow moments. Just as it was the one when Steve defeats Tony and gives up the shield.

Characters are all well done, well developed and very complete. What made an impression on me and made me love Captain America was how is childhood friend was more important than anything and anyone. He was not ready to give up on him. He is the last connection to the world as he knew it, to the world he called home. And we saw how in age of ultron he struggled to find home in the current age. This did not allow him to give up on this last link to that world.

Unlikely for superhero movies this movie made me think about real-life lessons. I liked how Captain America foresaw what it meant to sign a contract and I especially liked when he pointed out that they will lose freedom to people with agendas. This is something to think about.

Storytelling: great done, it starts with action, slows down enough to develop the story that leads to the high point of the fight and then it has the surprise element that leads to the real and final fight. So an active intro, a strong active middle and an surprise elemented active and morally strong ending.

Another thing I loved about this is the humour. The characters are all very sympathetic and humour is skilfully done in the right times and places.

A very well done movie. Looking forward to other parts and the last two infinity stones to show up.

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016)

Slow-actionless

[5/10 · 29 August 2016]

Well this was a good disappointment. I liked Man of Steel and I expected something similar with this one since it should be its follow-up but boy was I let down.

There were a lot of things that I didn't like about this movie that I will mention below.

Story-telling: extremely bad. Awful. The story is told slowly, there are a lot of unnecessary things that slow the story such as Batman's dreams. If you want to have his dreams as warnings OK but why make them so long. The whole story is unnecessarily overloaded with details that make it heavy and complicated. There is a lot of conspiracies, lies, intrigues its like watching a crime TV show and not an action movie. Batman's story is almost not explained at all (just that his parents got killed and Wonder Woman's not at all). In my opinion there should have been a movie about Batman and one about Wonder Woman before this part. They should watch Marvel's movies and take notes.

Characters: they all seem to be black and white only. There is attempt to make to explain where Lex is coming from with his actions but all we get is 'I am doing this because my dad was violent when I was a kid, so I lost confidence in god and now I want to prove you are not god'. Not powerful,not powerful at all. Then there is Batman. How come they have portrayed Batman as a complete fool that falls for Lex's traps so easily. His line of thought is 'Superman is more powerful than me so I must stop him because I can't control him or scare him or make him do that I want m'. Well Batman looks like a nice guy right?

Let's not mention how awful the fight scenes were. Batman moves slower than I do. And those cliché scenes where all there of them stand together facing the monster. No humour or funny moments. A huge disappointment.