Search
Search results
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated The Battle of Algiers (1966) in Movies
Jan 28, 2021
This film-maker was unknown to me entirely before I decided to watch this film. In fact, I had only heard of the film itself quite recently from seeing it mentioned as one of the best films in the genre as a commentary on political insurgency and civil unrest. It is so well regarded that even the US military used it to prepare troops for entering Iraq. The main actors are largely unknown and many of the supporting cast and extras are not actors at all. The camera is allowed to wander and wobble, and such is the feel of random chaos at times you’d be forgiven for thinking this was a documentary. Nominated for 3 Oscars, and faultless in achieving its goal of humanising both sides of an argument, you can see the influence on Oliver Stone and Paul Greengrass, to name but two better known directors with a political edge.
It’s not a film I would feel the need to go back to, unless demonstrating to someone how to make something staged feel entirely real. I admire this film very much, but wouldn’t exactly call it entertaining or even rewarding as a story. Its purpose is to reinforce the tragedy of a people facing oppression and to realise the lengths both sides will go to in protecting their ideals and relative freedoms. The excellent hand held photography and score by the always inspirational Ennio Moricone are other reasons to watch it. As a history lesson of North Africa post WWII it also has a lot to offer.
It’s not a film I would feel the need to go back to, unless demonstrating to someone how to make something staged feel entirely real. I admire this film very much, but wouldn’t exactly call it entertaining or even rewarding as a story. Its purpose is to reinforce the tragedy of a people facing oppression and to realise the lengths both sides will go to in protecting their ideals and relative freedoms. The excellent hand held photography and score by the always inspirational Ennio Moricone are other reasons to watch it. As a history lesson of North Africa post WWII it also has a lot to offer.
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated The Good Dinosaur (2015) in Movies
Feb 20, 2019
The first thing so say about this is that the trailers were very misleading. Instead of having a quiet, meek dinosaur meets human tale, we are given the opposite. In a world where the asteroid did not wipe out the dinosaurs, they have evolved into a farming species and after his father death, our eponymous Good Dinosaur is lost and must make his way home, when he befriends human boy, called Spot.
Spot is effectively a dog to our more cultured dinosaur who inhabit a world not at all dissimilar to the American Frontier. And there in lies the problem.
This is without a doubt the most beautifully animated film that I have ever seen, with a photo realistic animation so real, that it was distracting, as I actually wondered if they had cheated and blended real photography with CGI. The other issue was the setting and the love affair with old west which only really works if you are an American.
Yeah, we love a good western but this was just a bit of a weird interpretation, with T-Rex's driving cattle and Brontosaurus' growing corn. But having said all that, the plot as pure Pixar but without the humour. This is simply not funny and a change in tone for the studio but it is keeping with their groundbreaking approach to animation in many ways, this is as significant a breakthrough as Toy Story was back in 1995.
Yes, the animation was effectively driven by the same technology as most mainstream blockbusters but this film savored those moments, leaving us simply awestruck by the look and feel of this film.
Though it does feel at times to be a teaser reel for the animation capabilities of Pixar...
Spot is effectively a dog to our more cultured dinosaur who inhabit a world not at all dissimilar to the American Frontier. And there in lies the problem.
This is without a doubt the most beautifully animated film that I have ever seen, with a photo realistic animation so real, that it was distracting, as I actually wondered if they had cheated and blended real photography with CGI. The other issue was the setting and the love affair with old west which only really works if you are an American.
Yeah, we love a good western but this was just a bit of a weird interpretation, with T-Rex's driving cattle and Brontosaurus' growing corn. But having said all that, the plot as pure Pixar but without the humour. This is simply not funny and a change in tone for the studio but it is keeping with their groundbreaking approach to animation in many ways, this is as significant a breakthrough as Toy Story was back in 1995.
Yes, the animation was effectively driven by the same technology as most mainstream blockbusters but this film savored those moments, leaving us simply awestruck by the look and feel of this film.
Though it does feel at times to be a teaser reel for the animation capabilities of Pixar...
Gareth von Kallenbach (968 KP) rated 500 Days of Summer (2009) in Movies
Aug 9, 2019
The ever-quirky Zooey Deschanel stars alongside Joseph Gordon-Levitt reemerging from “10 Things I Hate About You” in the odd tale “(500) Days of Summer”.
This is the story of Tom an unhappy greeting card writer (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) who falls for his boss’s personal assistant, Summer (Zooey Deschanel). As the two become friends Summer reveals to the infatuated Tom that she does not believe in love. Dispute her disbelief the two begin spending time together and eventually friendship blossoms into an intimate relationship. This must be love, right?
Summer and Tom begin an on again off again romance, that centers around Tom’s constant optimism that she is indeed the one for him. But Summer’s inconsistent reactions and lack of desire for commitment leave the audience wondering how the scenario is going to work out.
The film uses a five hundred day counter to expose the story in a non-linear fashion, which would have been interesting if it had anything to do with the plot. There was no mystery unearthed or even character traits exposed through the wacky timeline, it simply kept viewers constantly aware of Tom’s unfortunate situation.
Among the film’s highlights are a choreographed dance sequence, interesting split screen photography, and sensational employment of color. Additionally simple yet strong costume choices, artistic use of architecture, fun music and witty interpersonal banter carry this otherwise depressing film.
Creating an overall disenchantment with relationships and a seething dislike for Summer make this film is far from jovial, but it does offer a darker perspective into the realistic nature of relationships.
Both leads deliver strong performances but the film was unexpectedly melancholy. “(500) Days of Summer” is simply trying too hard and making viewers feel bad in the process.
This is the story of Tom an unhappy greeting card writer (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) who falls for his boss’s personal assistant, Summer (Zooey Deschanel). As the two become friends Summer reveals to the infatuated Tom that she does not believe in love. Dispute her disbelief the two begin spending time together and eventually friendship blossoms into an intimate relationship. This must be love, right?
Summer and Tom begin an on again off again romance, that centers around Tom’s constant optimism that she is indeed the one for him. But Summer’s inconsistent reactions and lack of desire for commitment leave the audience wondering how the scenario is going to work out.
The film uses a five hundred day counter to expose the story in a non-linear fashion, which would have been interesting if it had anything to do with the plot. There was no mystery unearthed or even character traits exposed through the wacky timeline, it simply kept viewers constantly aware of Tom’s unfortunate situation.
Among the film’s highlights are a choreographed dance sequence, interesting split screen photography, and sensational employment of color. Additionally simple yet strong costume choices, artistic use of architecture, fun music and witty interpersonal banter carry this otherwise depressing film.
Creating an overall disenchantment with relationships and a seething dislike for Summer make this film is far from jovial, but it does offer a darker perspective into the realistic nature of relationships.
Both leads deliver strong performances but the film was unexpectedly melancholy. “(500) Days of Summer” is simply trying too hard and making viewers feel bad in the process.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated 8 1/2 (1963) in Movies
Jan 28, 2021
Fellini has six or seven movies that are considered genuine masterpieces, as well as many other perfectly decent efforts in a 40 year career. I love the idea of him and knew I would love his work, but to my shame it took this film for me to finally lose my Fellini cherry, aged 47. I can only begin by saying I adored it – loving each moment as a piece of art in itself, and the whole as a thing of true joy and wonder that has only grown in my imagination since seeing it. It made me laugh, made me sad, made me long for places and people from my past, made me think about my own identity and personality and place in the world. It also very much entertained me; I didn’t find it hard work like some on this list in any way.
Marcello Mastroianni is effortlessly cool and stylish, as is everyone in this semi-fantastical world of memories, dreams and fears. He lounges through the film in a way so naturally relaxed and interesting that you are drawn to every detail of his bizarre adventures. The presence of Claudia Cardinale and Anouk Aimée don’t hurt know bringing some Italian chic to affairs either. Visually, I lost count of the amount of times my jaw hit the ground! Freeze this rich and resplendent film in any moment and it will probably be an image worth framing. The black and white photography is so sharp, using light and dark in astonishing ways. What director since 1963 would not look at this and say “I am stealing that!”? Not a film you could watch every day, but one I know for sure will be amongst my favourites of this period forever. I can’t wait to watch his others!
Marcello Mastroianni is effortlessly cool and stylish, as is everyone in this semi-fantastical world of memories, dreams and fears. He lounges through the film in a way so naturally relaxed and interesting that you are drawn to every detail of his bizarre adventures. The presence of Claudia Cardinale and Anouk Aimée don’t hurt know bringing some Italian chic to affairs either. Visually, I lost count of the amount of times my jaw hit the ground! Freeze this rich and resplendent film in any moment and it will probably be an image worth framing. The black and white photography is so sharp, using light and dark in astonishing ways. What director since 1963 would not look at this and say “I am stealing that!”? Not a film you could watch every day, but one I know for sure will be amongst my favourites of this period forever. I can’t wait to watch his others!
Merissa (11704 KP) rated Strike a Pose (Model Love, #1) in Books
Oct 6, 2022
A city-country story with all the emotions.
STRIKE A POSE is one of the stories in the multi-author series, Model Love, and we return to Farthingdale Ranch. Sid is one of the ranch hands, working to help pay for his sister to attend college. Heston is one of the models used for a Western photography session. Sid helps Heston wear his cowboy hat correctly and gets snapped in a couple of photos. When the photos turn out to be too poor to use, the owner spots Sid and wants him as a model - for just two weeks. This would help pay for two years of college so, of course, Sid says yes.
Oh, man. This story! It really was a case of opposites attract. Sid was the naïve innocent from the country, and Heston was the worldly-wise (or is that -weary?) one to show him the ropes. The connection between the two was there from the get-go but neither of them acted on it for the longest time. Or at least, that's how it felt! Those kisses in the rain though! Phew, there was steam coming off my kindle. I loved seeing their relationship grow and develop into something worth keeping. The circumstances around that were sad, but I'm glad it happened (in a way) as I was worried about how they would stay together.
A fantastic return to Farthingdale Ranch and all the people who live there. I'm so glad that Sid got his story. And he's not Loud-Mouth Sid at all! Grrr!!!!! A city-country story with all the emotions, highly recommended by me.
** same worded review will appear elsewhere **
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book, and the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Oh, man. This story! It really was a case of opposites attract. Sid was the naïve innocent from the country, and Heston was the worldly-wise (or is that -weary?) one to show him the ropes. The connection between the two was there from the get-go but neither of them acted on it for the longest time. Or at least, that's how it felt! Those kisses in the rain though! Phew, there was steam coming off my kindle. I loved seeing their relationship grow and develop into something worth keeping. The circumstances around that were sad, but I'm glad it happened (in a way) as I was worried about how they would stay together.
A fantastic return to Farthingdale Ranch and all the people who live there. I'm so glad that Sid got his story. And he's not Loud-Mouth Sid at all! Grrr!!!!! A city-country story with all the emotions, highly recommended by me.
** same worded review will appear elsewhere **
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book, and the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated 3 Idiots (2009) in Movies
Mar 3, 2020
So, I am writing a coffee table book that selects the 200 top films of 2000 – 2019. Called, predictably, 21st Century Cinema: 200 Unmissable films. It uses a system of rating I devised called The Decinemal, which takes the ten categories by which a film can be rated (Direction, Script, Design, Lead Acting, Support Acting, Music, Photography, Critical Acclaim, Watchability and X-Factor) and scores them out of 10, to give an overall score out of 100. Whilst not foolproof, it does give a remarkable working basis for comparing movies of different genres, and the ratings often bear a striking relation to the democratic system used by IMDb – a film scoring 7.2 on that website might be a 75 decinemal, for example, and that feels like that validates its use.
It has been a very fun, if time consuming, project. The difficulty is keeping up with new releases every year, and trying to catch some of the more obscure foreign language films out there that get high scores on IMDb. One such film was 3 Idiots, to date the highest rated Bollywood film on that website, with a score of 8.5; which is high! Very high! So I have to watch it and find out for myself.
Now, Bollywood is not me for, barring the odd amusement of how bizarre they can be. I find the musical interludes often grating and incongruous, and the melodramatic acting styles something that the cinema of most other countries outgrew decades ago. So it is hard for me to be objective about it. On the whole they just don’t compete on any level with American, European or, well, any other country’s output. In short, I would never normally watch one at all.
Surprisingly, I found 3 Idiots, although clownish and OTT, quite entertaining from the start. I even found one or two of the obligatory musical numbers very catchy and a lot of fun! Also, lead actor Aamir Khan, one of India’s biggest stars, was very charming and watchable. Of course, it is colourful, loud and has a childish sensibility, but some moments made me genuinely laugh. The main problem actually came from it being padded out to almost 2 and 1/2 hours, which was far too long for comfort. If it had been more economical I may have even been able to say it was worth watching.
Sadly, it is the moments of cultural difference and pure silliness that dragged it down. Despite its positive points, ultimately it is a mess, and to compare it on the standard I judge all films I see I have to be fair and not patronise it. Certainly in terms of the Bollywood fare I have seen bits of over the years, I can see why it is so well thought of. I can also see how films like this gain such a high rating, because it is the native audience it was made for that cast the votes. Which is fair enough, but does give it an unreasonably high score.
I think if more people watched it and rated it, it would balance out at a 6.5, and it probably deserves that for sheer entertainment value. I have certainly seen many worse films! Applying The Decinemal objectively, however, it comes out like this: Direction 4, Script 5, Design 6, Lead Acting 6, Support acting 4, Music 5, Photography 6, Critical Acclaim 7, Wachability 5, x-Factor 6. Added up that gives it a Decinemal of 54 – a far cry from the 74 it would have needed to make my top 200. And I stand by that score, as the level of likelihood of everyone’s enjoyment of it.
To an extent it discourages me from watching anything from this part of the world again, but I can’t say I didn’t appreciate why it was such a big hit. Interesting.
It has been a very fun, if time consuming, project. The difficulty is keeping up with new releases every year, and trying to catch some of the more obscure foreign language films out there that get high scores on IMDb. One such film was 3 Idiots, to date the highest rated Bollywood film on that website, with a score of 8.5; which is high! Very high! So I have to watch it and find out for myself.
Now, Bollywood is not me for, barring the odd amusement of how bizarre they can be. I find the musical interludes often grating and incongruous, and the melodramatic acting styles something that the cinema of most other countries outgrew decades ago. So it is hard for me to be objective about it. On the whole they just don’t compete on any level with American, European or, well, any other country’s output. In short, I would never normally watch one at all.
Surprisingly, I found 3 Idiots, although clownish and OTT, quite entertaining from the start. I even found one or two of the obligatory musical numbers very catchy and a lot of fun! Also, lead actor Aamir Khan, one of India’s biggest stars, was very charming and watchable. Of course, it is colourful, loud and has a childish sensibility, but some moments made me genuinely laugh. The main problem actually came from it being padded out to almost 2 and 1/2 hours, which was far too long for comfort. If it had been more economical I may have even been able to say it was worth watching.
Sadly, it is the moments of cultural difference and pure silliness that dragged it down. Despite its positive points, ultimately it is a mess, and to compare it on the standard I judge all films I see I have to be fair and not patronise it. Certainly in terms of the Bollywood fare I have seen bits of over the years, I can see why it is so well thought of. I can also see how films like this gain such a high rating, because it is the native audience it was made for that cast the votes. Which is fair enough, but does give it an unreasonably high score.
I think if more people watched it and rated it, it would balance out at a 6.5, and it probably deserves that for sheer entertainment value. I have certainly seen many worse films! Applying The Decinemal objectively, however, it comes out like this: Direction 4, Script 5, Design 6, Lead Acting 6, Support acting 4, Music 5, Photography 6, Critical Acclaim 7, Wachability 5, x-Factor 6. Added up that gives it a Decinemal of 54 – a far cry from the 74 it would have needed to make my top 200. And I stand by that score, as the level of likelihood of everyone’s enjoyment of it.
To an extent it discourages me from watching anything from this part of the world again, but I can’t say I didn’t appreciate why it was such a big hit. Interesting.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Babyteeth (2019) in Movies
Aug 25, 2020
I've had more fun at the orthodontist's
Now, before I start, I know I'm likely to be at odds with a lot of viewers on this one. Having had a glance at the IMDB ratings, I can see a lot of arthouse love for this Australian movie. But this really was not for me.
Eliza Scanlen plays Australian schoolgirl Milla, displaying typically rebellious symptoms of adolescence but hampered by a crippling medical issue. She meets a 23-year old drug addict, Moses (Toby Wallace), and the pair feel an immediate pull towards each other, much to the horror of her parents Henry (Ben Mendelsohn) and Anna (Essie Davis). The kids are dysfunctional (for different reasons); the parents are not much better. Adding to the drama is a strange violin teacher (Eugene Gilfedder) and a pregnant (MILF-to-be) next door neighbour (Emily Barclay). We follow the life and love of Milla as she struggles with her circumstances... and the last of her Babyteeth.
I can draw parallels here to the movie "Animals" from last year. Indeed to the Oscar-winner "Moonlight" from four year's ago. I could readily perceive it to be intelligent and artfully produced. But I'm afraid I felt zero empathy or pull from any of the characters. Given that, and the slow burn of writer Rita Kalnejais's screenplay, I found myself constantly looking at my watch for the last half-hour of the movie.
The movie's not without its merits though. Babyteeth has picked up a number of nominations, and as many wins, on the international film-festival circuit, mostly for the direction of Shannon Murphy. This is a first-time feature for TV-director Murphy (she directed two episodes from this year's series of "Killing Eve" for example). Awards have also gone to Toby Wallace for his portrayal of the slightly unhinged and unpredictable Moses. But for me, it was Eliza Scanlen's performance as Milla that appealed to me most and kept my attention. Other-worldly and slightly ethereal, she pulls off the role well. Scanlen was of course Beth March in the recent superb version of "Little Woman". (She's a young lady with great potential, but she needs to be careful not to get typecast as sickly waifs!)
Babyteeth was for me a curate's egg in the photography department. Cinematography was by Andrew Commis, and I found it both breathtaking and frustrating in almost equal measure. There's a scene towards the end of the movie with Milla's face half-lit in the moonlight that was reminiscent to me of the star-child in "2001: A Space Odyssey". Simply gorgeous. And scenes in a nightclub are both strangely and effectively shot. But - and art-house movies seem to mandate this approach - the movie is shot on handheld cameras. This makes a lot of the shots drift in and out of focus. Moreover - and most frustratingly for me - it makes the multitude of scene titles, employed in the telling, float ever-so-slightly against the backgrounds, with a generally nauseating effect.
I'll no doubt feel a right Charlie if Babyteeth gets into the Oscars nominations short-list. But for me, it just wasn't engaging enough to be entertaining. It's billed as a "Comedy Drama". While there were a few good comic lines, it rarely made me do more than smile. And as for the drama, I'm afraid tears were far from being spilled. It's in no way a "bad film": it just personally wasn't for me.
(For the full graphical review please check out One Mann's Movie on https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/08/25/babyteeth-you-might-have-more-fun-at-the-orthodontists/.)
Eliza Scanlen plays Australian schoolgirl Milla, displaying typically rebellious symptoms of adolescence but hampered by a crippling medical issue. She meets a 23-year old drug addict, Moses (Toby Wallace), and the pair feel an immediate pull towards each other, much to the horror of her parents Henry (Ben Mendelsohn) and Anna (Essie Davis). The kids are dysfunctional (for different reasons); the parents are not much better. Adding to the drama is a strange violin teacher (Eugene Gilfedder) and a pregnant (MILF-to-be) next door neighbour (Emily Barclay). We follow the life and love of Milla as she struggles with her circumstances... and the last of her Babyteeth.
I can draw parallels here to the movie "Animals" from last year. Indeed to the Oscar-winner "Moonlight" from four year's ago. I could readily perceive it to be intelligent and artfully produced. But I'm afraid I felt zero empathy or pull from any of the characters. Given that, and the slow burn of writer Rita Kalnejais's screenplay, I found myself constantly looking at my watch for the last half-hour of the movie.
The movie's not without its merits though. Babyteeth has picked up a number of nominations, and as many wins, on the international film-festival circuit, mostly for the direction of Shannon Murphy. This is a first-time feature for TV-director Murphy (she directed two episodes from this year's series of "Killing Eve" for example). Awards have also gone to Toby Wallace for his portrayal of the slightly unhinged and unpredictable Moses. But for me, it was Eliza Scanlen's performance as Milla that appealed to me most and kept my attention. Other-worldly and slightly ethereal, she pulls off the role well. Scanlen was of course Beth March in the recent superb version of "Little Woman". (She's a young lady with great potential, but she needs to be careful not to get typecast as sickly waifs!)
Babyteeth was for me a curate's egg in the photography department. Cinematography was by Andrew Commis, and I found it both breathtaking and frustrating in almost equal measure. There's a scene towards the end of the movie with Milla's face half-lit in the moonlight that was reminiscent to me of the star-child in "2001: A Space Odyssey". Simply gorgeous. And scenes in a nightclub are both strangely and effectively shot. But - and art-house movies seem to mandate this approach - the movie is shot on handheld cameras. This makes a lot of the shots drift in and out of focus. Moreover - and most frustratingly for me - it makes the multitude of scene titles, employed in the telling, float ever-so-slightly against the backgrounds, with a generally nauseating effect.
I'll no doubt feel a right Charlie if Babyteeth gets into the Oscars nominations short-list. But for me, it just wasn't engaging enough to be entertaining. It's billed as a "Comedy Drama". While there were a few good comic lines, it rarely made me do more than smile. And as for the drama, I'm afraid tears were far from being spilled. It's in no way a "bad film": it just personally wasn't for me.
(For the full graphical review please check out One Mann's Movie on https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/08/25/babyteeth-you-might-have-more-fun-at-the-orthodontists/.)
An enjoyable Victorian mystery
Julia McAllister is a female photographer in 1895 who works for herself - which is a struggle in England at this time, as she would have had no legal rights. She pretends to her clients that she is working for a male photographer, but in reality he left her the business when he died. So, in order to make ends meet she finds work taking ‘French Style’ photos. These were risqué pornographic photos. Julia makes sure her models are comfortable with what they’re doing and that they’re well paid. She feels responsible for these young women.
When three of them are found murdered, and Julia is visited by an Inspector Collingwood asking questions because her stamp is on the back of the photos found with these women, Julia is devastated. Devastated that she is in the frame, and devastated that she has lost women who she considers to be friends. So Julia sets out to find the killer herself, because she has secrets that she doesn’t want anyone finding out.
This book is pretty jam packed with dead bodies, if I’m honest. The dead models and two unconnected men. Julia is involved with finding the perpetrators of these deaths too. So if you don’t like dead bodies, you’re going to struggle with this one! Although it’s not graphic in any way. It’s not a salacious book - the photos aren’t really described in any great detail: the making of them is just a part of the story.
I liked Julia. She is a caring character who looks after her models, her neighbours, and she even gives a home to a street urchin. I found the photography descriptions (taking photos and developing them) really interesting, and I thought the setting was really well described: the sights and sounds of a busy urban Victorian England especially. This is a very enjoyable book, and one for those who enjoy an easy reading mystery.
Many thanks to Sapere Books for sending me my copy to read and honestly review.
When three of them are found murdered, and Julia is visited by an Inspector Collingwood asking questions because her stamp is on the back of the photos found with these women, Julia is devastated. Devastated that she is in the frame, and devastated that she has lost women who she considers to be friends. So Julia sets out to find the killer herself, because she has secrets that she doesn’t want anyone finding out.
This book is pretty jam packed with dead bodies, if I’m honest. The dead models and two unconnected men. Julia is involved with finding the perpetrators of these deaths too. So if you don’t like dead bodies, you’re going to struggle with this one! Although it’s not graphic in any way. It’s not a salacious book - the photos aren’t really described in any great detail: the making of them is just a part of the story.
I liked Julia. She is a caring character who looks after her models, her neighbours, and she even gives a home to a street urchin. I found the photography descriptions (taking photos and developing them) really interesting, and I thought the setting was really well described: the sights and sounds of a busy urban Victorian England especially. This is a very enjoyable book, and one for those who enjoy an easy reading mystery.
Many thanks to Sapere Books for sending me my copy to read and honestly review.
Colin O'Donoghue recommended The Conversation (1974) in Movies (curated)
Gareth von Kallenbach (968 KP) rated World War Z (2013) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Inspired by the book of the same name, “World War Z” starring Brad Pitt has made it to theaters after several delays including seven weeks of additional shooting that was ordered by the studio after principal photography had ended. While the book covers survivor interviews in the wake of the zombie pandemic, the film covers the early days the outbreak and casts Pitt as Gerry Lane, a former U.N. troubleshooter who is left his life in the field for the ability to be a stay-at-home husband and dad to his wife and daughters. When an unexpected outbreak starts to lay waste to several cities, Gerry and his family are evacuated by his old U.N. Allies to a secure location aboard a naval flotilla and he is told that his family will remain in security providing he agrees to spearhead an investigation to determine the source of the outbreak.
With very few options Gerry leads a team to Korea in an attempt to get to the source of the outbreak and find a cure, or at the very least, a course of treatment to battle an outbreak that’s quickly is decimating the world’s population and threatening to destroy life as we know it in a very short time. The dangers are numerous and Gerry soon learns that there is a much larger puzzle to be solved which sets them on a journey around the world in a race against time to save humanity. Along the way he encounters signs of the world gone mad and utter devastation from locales ranging from Jerusalem to Cardiff as it becomes obvious that the infection has spared no region of the globe. With time running out, Gerry must find a way to turn the tide and save humanity before it is too late. With his resources dwindling he embarks on a desperate mission to test a theory and save the world.
The film does have its share of tense moments however the PG-13 rating does severely limit the amount of gore and horror that can be displayed. One key scene implied that a weapon had become imbedded in an infected enemy and that Gerry was struggling to extract it in order to use it to defend himself. Due to the limitations of the rating this had to be implied rather than shown and Pitt came across as more comical than tense and desperate.
The movie also suffers from converted 3-D which does absolutely nothing to enhance the film as there were very few moments that benefited from the 3-D technique. Perhaps if the film had been shot in 3-D the quality it would’ve been better but it was clear that several of the scenes in the film were not set up nor shot with 3-D in mind.
There are some very good effects; especially the ones were hordes of infected throw themselves recklessly like swarming insects upon barricaded survivors which really helped underscore just how hopeless and desperate the situation for the survivors was. No matter how much firepower you have, a wall of infected coming at you in endless waves is eventually going to outlast your supply of ammunition.
There had been some reported tensions on the set between Pitt and Director Marc Forster, but to me the biggest red flag was the seven additional weeks of shooting that were done after principal photography had been completed. While re-shoots are not uncommon, re-shoots of this length are, especially when it led to the film being delayed from its original planned release to the summer.
In the end what you have is an uneven effort. The film has a very good concept, good cast, and potential to be a fantastic series but suffers from a real lack of scares. It’s a sanitized look at a zombie invasion that greatly undermines the subject and the source material. The studio has hopes of doing a trilogy of films and I would definitely like to see future releases in the series provided they improve upon the original, offer films that are more in keeping with the book and are more respectful to zombie genre. As it stands now, Pitt does the best he can with the material but is let down by a script that is big on clichés and offers very little in the way of scares and originality.
http://sknr.net/2013/06/21/world-war-z/
With very few options Gerry leads a team to Korea in an attempt to get to the source of the outbreak and find a cure, or at the very least, a course of treatment to battle an outbreak that’s quickly is decimating the world’s population and threatening to destroy life as we know it in a very short time. The dangers are numerous and Gerry soon learns that there is a much larger puzzle to be solved which sets them on a journey around the world in a race against time to save humanity. Along the way he encounters signs of the world gone mad and utter devastation from locales ranging from Jerusalem to Cardiff as it becomes obvious that the infection has spared no region of the globe. With time running out, Gerry must find a way to turn the tide and save humanity before it is too late. With his resources dwindling he embarks on a desperate mission to test a theory and save the world.
The film does have its share of tense moments however the PG-13 rating does severely limit the amount of gore and horror that can be displayed. One key scene implied that a weapon had become imbedded in an infected enemy and that Gerry was struggling to extract it in order to use it to defend himself. Due to the limitations of the rating this had to be implied rather than shown and Pitt came across as more comical than tense and desperate.
The movie also suffers from converted 3-D which does absolutely nothing to enhance the film as there were very few moments that benefited from the 3-D technique. Perhaps if the film had been shot in 3-D the quality it would’ve been better but it was clear that several of the scenes in the film were not set up nor shot with 3-D in mind.
There are some very good effects; especially the ones were hordes of infected throw themselves recklessly like swarming insects upon barricaded survivors which really helped underscore just how hopeless and desperate the situation for the survivors was. No matter how much firepower you have, a wall of infected coming at you in endless waves is eventually going to outlast your supply of ammunition.
There had been some reported tensions on the set between Pitt and Director Marc Forster, but to me the biggest red flag was the seven additional weeks of shooting that were done after principal photography had been completed. While re-shoots are not uncommon, re-shoots of this length are, especially when it led to the film being delayed from its original planned release to the summer.
In the end what you have is an uneven effort. The film has a very good concept, good cast, and potential to be a fantastic series but suffers from a real lack of scares. It’s a sanitized look at a zombie invasion that greatly undermines the subject and the source material. The studio has hopes of doing a trilogy of films and I would definitely like to see future releases in the series provided they improve upon the original, offer films that are more in keeping with the book and are more respectful to zombie genre. As it stands now, Pitt does the best he can with the material but is let down by a script that is big on clichés and offers very little in the way of scares and originality.
http://sknr.net/2013/06/21/world-war-z/