I enjoyed the first Anchorman. It was goofy, yet you had a sense of where it was going. The one liners were flawless, which made it the cult classic it is today. I realized I could only see a movie like this once every two years. When its sequel came around, I expected the same. It was exactly what I expected... In the first half. The first half contained some classic one liners, and fantastic situations these characters are in. The story wasn't that strong, but that was the first Anchorman's problem. The second half was a collapse. A collapse in storytelling, writing, and Will Farrell got a little old. The first half could have gotten at most an eight if it stood alone. The second half was also too overlong, they crammed too many fanfare elements that they felt they needed to keep from the first half. It made it feel like a rehash, not a sequel (trust me, you will know exactly when this happens). In the end, there are things that this first half cannot make up for in the second half. This review, to some may not be a glowing recommendation. However, if you are a fan of the first film, you have probably already have seen this.
Reviews
26 Reviews
Love Actually
(2003)
Too ambitious for its own good, but the cast charms
23 November 2013
Love Actually is a film that thinks that it is trying to defy conventions and other generic plot points to tell a poignant and comically rich storyline with memorable characters and various other elements that will make it a Christmas classic. That is a very audacious attempt for a romantic comedy. Regardless, director Richard Curtis is talented, but everything he touches doesn't turn to gold... or silver. The question is: can this film succeed? There are parts when it does and there are parts when it doesn't. It does not mean it does it poorly, but it dwells into the clichés of its genre. Curtis tries to be an overachiever and sets up too many story lines and characters thinking that they will eventually (and cleverly) cross over and meet up at the very end. Like I said, his strategy is very hit and miss. However there are parts where I felt he did things perfectly: the beginning and the ending. These were the parts where it was original, especially the last three minutes of the movie. In my opinion, that was probably one of the best endings Curtis could have thought of given the circumstances. The performances are even better. Richard Curtis has assembled the best character actors in England to make this film. There was really no performance I could complain about, it was done practically. The main payoff for me is that, at the end, Curtis prioritizes. He picks the stories that actually mean something to us and develops them to the best of his ability. Instead of developing something that we dislike and want to turn off if we hear any more about it.
Gravity
(2013)
Best film of 2013 so far-
20 October 2013
Before this film, in my opinion the greatest special effects of all time were in Avatar. Everything was so realistic, you could see sweat on their faces. This film not only trumps everything that Avatar has brought us, but I really don't see these effects aging for a long, long time. I could be proved wrong, you could see the models in Star Wars, the shark looks like a dummy in Jaws, but this might be different. I am a big fan of Cuarón's style as a director. I love the darker tone that he brings to his films, his point of view shots in his films are flawless. He went all out, he pushed the boundaries for not only what he could do, but what a director can do. Same with the acting. Sandra Bullock gives a great performance as Ryan Stone. If she was any lesser of an actor than the effect that this film had on us, would be lesser. Bullock is one of those actors that you root for every time. She has that charisma, you want her to survive. In my opinion, the most atmospheric and powerful moments of the film is when she is alone. This is a tremendous feat, considering she is in front of a green screen 99% of the time. George Clooney brings a likability to his role, his character was very entertaining and a relief, when the film was at its darkest. This is the movie event of the year so far, no doubt about it. If you haven't seen a film that you enjoyed so far this year, go see this film if you haven't already.
"Every shot there's a bluescreen, even if it's at a window"
13 September 2013
The only thing positive I can say about this film is that it is better than Phantom Menace. That is the only thing I can say that makes this movie remotely recommendable... That doesn't necessarily mean its a great film, let alone a good one. The film suffers from being too creatively controlled by George Lucas. The reason why Empire was good was that Lucas only wrote the script... And it had to be revised. It is his usual tension-free, bland dialogue script that gives the movie a minority of its problems. This was a classic example in the fool me once shame on him, fool me twice shame on me. The producers should have seen this coming and should not have given Lucas as much creative control as he did. Most of the plot devises he sets up crashes and burns. It is a catastrophe of epic proportions. The "romance" in this film between Hayden Christensen and Natalie Portman crumbles because of bland dialogue and implausible plot devises. "I'm a senator" Samuel L Jackson, Ewan McGreggor and Christopher Lee give decent performances. The problem is is that they are so detached with their environment. Like their only purpose was to take out a lightsaber each scene. But with Hayden Christensen... Good God what happened there? Some of the worst acting, no, worst line delivery I have seen in a while. Tommy Wiseau could give better line delivery than that man. But no, The script isn't the downfall of the film, nor is the acting. The use of CGI in every scene, literally every scene is what killed the film for me. The effects added zero tension zero thrills and had zero purpose. In the end, this film had to be the darkest of the trilogy because it was the second act, the characters needed a challenge they could overcome. The only purpose this film will ever have is that this is some minor details between Episode I and Episode III.
Lucas at his low point
14 August 2013
I hate this movie, I really do. George Lucas squanders whatever talent and reputation that he had left on this god awful film that sadly has made one billion dollars. In the world's defense, they did not know what they were getting into. The beginning of the film tells us that it is doomed from the start. Zero character development... Just light sabers. Hard to believe the previous installments were compelling. However, I can see what Lucas was trying to do. He was trying to find familiarity. He did it in the wrong thing, it is better to find familiarity in plot points and certain details, sadly he tried to find it in more lasting things, like characters. That is where surprisingly, where the film reaches its lows. He tries to make it an ensemble thing. In a film like this, that setup cannot work. He needed to give one character, and I do mean one character a focus, or a journey. You need to get attached to characters before they engage in risky situations, it will have more of an effect because your emotional effect resonates into making the characters go through real peril. This setup does not work, that's why the film fails. The performances do not make this film better, not one bit. Liam Neeson and Ian McGregor give decent performances, but the real weak link is Jake Lloyd as Anakin Skywalker, and Ahamed Best as Jar Jar Binks. Both easily some of the worst performances from a child actor, and an actor in general I have ever seen. In Anakin's case, he needed to be a teenager or a young adult, that will make more of the situations he goes through believable. But Jar Jar, I despised every waking moment, every dollar wasted through CGI, every second I heard his grinding, agonizing voice, the bottom line is that this character was not needed, ever, what were you thinking George? What were you thinking? There actually was something I liked from this film- Samuel L Jackson as a Jedi! Best casting ever, enough said. In the end, this is fortunately the lowest possible point in the prequel trilogy, if you saw it, stay as far away as possible.
Elysium
(I) (2013)
Blonkamp should stick to directing this next one
11 August 2013
I couldn't decide whether to give this a 6 or a 7. Either way this film has its strengths and has its weaknesses. It all just eventually cancels out to the point where there really isn't a score to rank it. It isn't a good movie, but at the end it isn't a very bad one either. Neil Blonkamp is probably one of my top ten contemporary directors. Props for him for finding an original, solid story to satisfy moviegoers. However, it can only satisfy. The characters are a little flat, except for Sharlto Copley's (which I will get to later), it gets to the point where some of these are screaming to be noticed before they're thrown to the side. I liked the three leads though, Matt Damon gives a strong performance as always. I was pretty surprised where Jodie Foster went, this is definitely a change of pace for her, and I really don't know what to think. Sharlto Copley was the stand out for this film. He hasn't been in much since his flop The A-Team, but this guy has range. I'm excited to hear that he's doing some more stuff this year. The effects I thought were outstanding. I know that its pretty much expected these days that effects have to be great in films, but in my opinion these are probably one of the best ones this year. The film has its weak spots, but Blomkamp does give it his all directing-wise. But in the end, it's really your choice if it's worth seeing
The Wolverine
(2013)
The Wolverine Title Everyone Was Waiting For?
2 August 2013
The X Men series has always been an OK one for me. They weren't bad movies, but there were so many better outlets out there. However, I am kind of excited for what they're going to do for Days of the Future Past, and apparently this is a setup to it? It's not, it's a story on its own and for the most part it has some strong moments to it. Hugh Jackman gives a great performance as always, and it has a decent supporting cast. This takes place after the awful X 3 the Last Stand, so it's best to read up on this or major spoilers! For a PG-13 movie it's shockingly violent. It does make for some great action, but still the amount is pretty severe for an X Men movie. It goes all out at the very end, but that's when it goes all cartoonish on us. It is such a change in tone from the gritty first two acts. I actually liked the grit, he was going through some horrible emotional stuff and they do not sugar coat it. However, Hugh Jackman's performance is worth the watch and the action is excellent, go if you feel like it.
Oscar bait and an awful kid
2 August 2013
I hated the kid. I know hate is a strong word, but I just despise his character. Thomas Horn actually tries with this performance, but it is a combination of bad writing and misguided directing that drags this movie down, fast. The book was highly controversial because some believed that it was banking off of such a tragedy as 9/11. I dislike the film because it is Oscar bait. I hate it more because the Oscars went hook, line and sinker for this film and I don't know why. No I do know why, because this is Oscar bait. Tom Hanks gives a performance that cannot redeem this film, he tries as well as a remarkably talented cast including Sandra Bullock, Max Von Snydow and Viola Davis, but these performances cannot redeem this film. The third act tries to turn the film around with an unpredictable conclusion, however it cannot save it because of the sugary final ten minutes, the writing just crashes and burns at such a pivotal time, I almost gave it a five, almost but it was too late. The damage is done, I will never see this movie again.
The Watch
(I) (2012)
Don't watch The Watch
14 July 2013
The reason why a film like The Watch falls flat on its face is because it thinks that just because that there's cursing, it's funny... It's not funny. It was never funny, and I personally think that it was intentionally trying to drill this "hilarious" thought into our minds. The most cursing I've ever seen in a film and most of it didn't make sense at all. I just wasted two hours on a movie I should have never seen to begin with. The talent in this film was completely wasted. Ben Stiller and Vince Vaughn haven't made a decent film since 2005, so there's no use to talk about them. Jonah Hill and that Richard Ayoade were the talent that was squandered in this film. The least I can say was that Ayoade was likable. All of the others were filthy mouthed selfish perverts who had no decency or intelligence to steer the movie in the right direction. Personally, judging from the score above is how I can never recommend this movie to you. You're welcome.
Apocalypse Now
(1979)
The horror... The horror
6 July 2013
I saw the Redux version. I saw it and I thought it was one of the most thought provoking, yet disturbing depictions of not only war, but life. I will never see it again, because the effect is permanent. I had very high expectations for it. Not only because it is revered as one of the greatest films of all time, but because in this case: it's the director's cut. A whole hour of released footage, all packed into it. I have to say that the majority of it, it had an impact, even though some people viewed the original one as better, it had an impact. The opening scene is one of the most powerful openings in movie history, all the destruction, all the damage that we did in that country is beautifully depicted. Robert Duvall is definitely one of the major highlights of the movie, the reckless lieutenant colonel Kilgore, his performance is haunting, in the way of a man who was made for war, a man that lives and breathes death and destruction. His appearance is brief, but his effect is permanent. Martin Sheen gives a very nuanced, calm performance as the film's protagonist, the man that doesn't know what he's fighting for, which in itself is very a very compelling subject. And last but not least, Marlon Brando, makes colonel Kurtz one of the most compelling characters of all time (in my book), Kurtz is a world weary, manipulative and insane fascist. But at the same time, he knows his problems and he knows them well. That's what's compelling. But in the end, this is a war film best left for interpretation. I thought it was a well-made, staggeringly powerful, work of cinema.
The Internship
(2013)
Relatable, if not bland
28 June 2013
When I saw the reviews for the Internship, my expectations dropped. A 29% on Rotten Tomatoes was a good enough reason for me to not see it in the theater, but go check it out on redbox later. But I saw it, with my parents too, and it had some great one-liners. That was its strength. I understand Vince Vaughn, and it's very hit and miss. I chuckled at the technological illiteracy of the two main characters, which made my parents laugh the hardest in a while. It is a great premise, a great opportunity for some great fish out of water stuff. Potential wasted, that's what this movie is. The more I look at it the more I feel that this movie could've been something great. But it's not great, it's mediocre at best. The story is extremely clichéd. There is a romance that doesn't need to be there, there is adversaries that do not need to be there. There are a lot of things in this film that doesn't need to be there. All I know is that this film could've been great and it wasn't. But what it does have that is good stands out and stays with you, which is more than you can ask for for a movie that has their second act go through a brutally long pop song montage. It's brutal. But in the end, decide for yourself if it's worth seeing, you may be surprised, or disappointed, because that's all that matters.
Man of Steel
(2013)
Man of Setup
16 June 2013
Man of Steel is very ambitious. It is written by David Goyer, who wrote the Dark Knight and the Dark Knight Rises, and is produced by Christopher Nolan, the director of the previous two titles. Warner Bros. is making the bold move of having him oversee their latest DC titles. Personally, I think it's a smart move, considering how I found the two films to be great films in general. I was a little skeptical about Zack Snyder's direction. Considering he has range from 300 to Sucker Punch. I was actually hoping that it would be good. I found the pacing in the first twenty minutes to be awful. Everything was happening so fast, it didn't let the audience breathe, considering it was the prologue. But as the narrative shifted, I felt more comfortable with it all. Henry Cavill is a very good Superman, I've heard of some of his works and he can pull off the role very well. Amy Adams is a great actress and she can pull off a role like Lois Lane with ease. Michael Shannon gives an appropriately bombastic turn as Zod. And Kevin Costner actually does a fine job as Jonathan Kent. Russel Crowe gives a very Russel Crowe performance, nothing really new, but nothing really bad. The CGI is great, a $225 million budget actually went somewhere. But the action sequence at the end went about twenty minutes longer than it should've, but before the novelty wore off it was pretty impressive. The way they end the film is a very impressive way to set up the next film, they actually gave Superman a reason to do what he did and I'm glad they did that. I like the way they are continuing this trend of superhero movies, and I really hope it continues.
The Dark Knight Rises
(2012)
A satisfyingly epic conclusion
16 June 2013
I loved the Dark Knight. I loved its complexities, I loved its performances and I loved its direction. It was not only a great superhero film but a great film in general. Did they exactly need a conclusion to Batman's story? That's really not for me to decide, but they did it and in my opinion it ended in the best possible way. Not the best way, but the best possible way. This is an excellent film, it is excellent because it demonstrates everything that made the Dark Knight Trilogy complex, and because of Nolan's direction it made it even better. Christian Bale gives a fine performance as Batman, the theatrical voice is still there, but it's toned down. I could barely recognize Tom Hardy as Bane, the voice is a little much but he still does good nevertheless. I really don't get all the hate for Anne Hathaway, she's a good actress, regardless of what her ambitions might be, she did good in Les Miz but did well here. Joseph Gordon- Levitt did good as usual, and Gary Oldman Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman can do this in their sleep. The Dark Knight was what it was because it had a realism to it, this could definitely happen in real life, in regards to the Joker. The realism fades when Bane comes along but that's not a bad thing if the story is told well (and it is). If you've seen the Dark Knight, go see this, and if you're looking for a great movie go see this.
Les Misérables
(2012)
You will appreciate it afterward
7 June 2013
Tom Hooper knew what he was doing when he put forth the thought of making the actors sing live in Les Miserables, but it needed to be in a more steadier hand. The pros was that he hired experienced actors that have sung in musicals. The cons however was hiring an actor like Russel Crowe. Hugh Jackman does his best, he really does he deserved his Oscar nomination, you can tell that this man has done this before. Same with Anne Hathaway, even though it seems that she has less screen time than Anthony Hopkins in Silence of the Lambs. Russel Crowe is the black sheep of the film- it was like he punched himself in the stomach really, really hard before each scene. He cannot stop singing in the upper register and it is very distracting. I am not a very big fan of his acting all together, it seemed that his character had no development whatsoever and that he struggled to illustrate any of his complexities. Everyone else did OK. There was nothing that really stood out. About 80% of all the shots were up close at the actor's faces, which was extremely distracting. In the end, the one element that saves the film is the music. One of the only ways I can recommend this film is the phenomenal music, which is what got me through this film, which is what will get you through this film. There is really nothing else I can say but, you will appreciate it afterward. No, not to like the film but to appreciate it.
Jerry Maguire
(1996)
Tom Cruise's Greatest Performance
7 June 2013
Jerry Maguire is what it is because it blends everything it has to begin with, with talented writing and phenomenal performances from Tom Cruise and Cuba Gooding Jr. This story at first is in a way, a satire of American sports. Everything from NFL drafts to player's wages, the film exploits everything in between at the very beginning. At first, Jerry Maguire is Tom Cruise. Literally, this is the same character that Cruise has played in every film since Risky Business. However, you really get to know the character and feel great sympathy for him. He certainly did not deserve everything to happen to him, and you really get a great sense of his peers as well. Is this really what it is, or more like, is this really how it is? Either way this is the best performance of Tom Cruise's career hands-down. Cuba Gooding Jr is the real star of the show. He deserved his best supporting actor Oscar as much as Cruise deserved his best actor. The two work well off each other, and you really anticipate the next time they are on screen together. The film slowly evolves into a love story, not only between Cruise and Renée Zellweger, but the bond between Cruise and Cuba. This is a film that works, every cheesy but quotable line, every chuckle from Cuba Gooding Jr being an outlandish diva and every time you realize that this is a film that is much deeper than what you may have thought. Go see it.
Life of Pi
(2012)
A marvel of technical proportions
24 May 2013
This film is a miracle. It really is. The fact that a film ten years ago that was deemed impossible by the author who wrote the book, and how far our technology has advanced is a miracle. In my opinion it blows every other film's special effects out of the water, this is the best special effects ever put on film. Another marvel is Suraj Sharma's performance. This kid had to make us believe that this huge tiger was on the boat, had to have some sort of weight to it, and most importantly, to fear it, to fear it's every move. This kid has great things ahead of him. What makes book to movie adaptations work is the story, if the story is adaptable, and the project is in steady hands, everything will be okay. That's what happened with this film. Ang Lee is a visionary, there is nothing this man can't do in regards to effects mixed with story telling to make this phenomenally crafted film. However, like the novel before it, the film has a few slow parts to it, but when it kicks into gear, it kicks into gear. That's why Life of Pi works. Which is why if you haven't- go see it.
Star Trek Into Darkness
(2013)
Where no man has gone before...
19 May 2013
I'm not a Trekkie. I never have been, and I probably never will. But when I saw Star Trek, I knew this series was something special. This is the Dark Knight of the second Star Trek series. It not only builds on the enthusiasm and care that JJ Abrams provided, but builds on the possible dramatic tension that Stark Treck brings us. Abrams has gone where no man has gone before in the Star Trek series. Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto and everyone in the first one returns, and they give fine, enthusiastic performances. Karl Urban as Bones is one of the many highlights of the film. Another one is Benedict Cumberbatch. I have to admit, I saw this twist about his character coming, this twist will definitely please Trekkies, and non fans alike. It parallels Iron Man 3's but, it has the momentum to keep the film going, which is all I can ask for. The lens flare is still there, not nearly as obnoxious as last time. Abrams is definitely trying to make this a trademark. If you want to see a good summer flick, I would really, really recommend this one.
Zero Dark Thirty
(2012)
A gripping, suspenseful thriller
19 May 2013
Jessica Chastain's performance is worth the price of admission, just saying. Her performance makes me debate weather or not a CIA operative like her existed. She's just a great character to watch. The torture scene is the most controversial of the film, but in my opinion, the one in Casino Royale is worse. Jason Clarke gives a very underrated performance as the torturer. Even though i've seen worse, it is still a very tough scene to watch, surprisingly, he's the comic relief. The latter quarter of the film could just be it's own film (I won't tell you why, but you will think that too after it's done). Everyone else though, is very out of the way. Chastain's the star of course but even so, they all are pawns in her game against Bin Laden. To be honest, I kind of like that. But I digress, it is a very good film, with very good writing, and very good performances, despite most of them not leaving an impression. Go see it
To Kill a Mockingbird
(1962)
See this first
17 May 2013
I read the book. That's the reason why a film with an 8.5 average gets a 5 from me. I read the book. If I didn't, it would still be an OK film, there are so many scenes that feel out of place, and so many important characters that got cut out, and the characters that they DID leave, were not developed. Another reason was, that the actress who played Scout (I don't care what her real name is, just read) was annoying, really really annoying. Every time she spoke in that false southern accent, it made me cringe. The person who played Mayella Ewell was enjoyable though, and I thought Tommy Wiseau was a bad actor. Now the majority of praise for this film was Gregory Peck as Atticus, and... it really didn't do that for me, not that it was bad or anything, but it was all in a personal preference. In the end, if you want to see the film, see it first. This is one of the only times I will tell you this because it works. If you want to love this film like everyone else does, see it first.
Iron Man Three
(2013)
Good Superhero film, decent film
15 May 2013
When I saw the first Iron Man, I loved it. The action was great, the back story was even better and it had a solid plot and story. It's great, it was great. Then Iron Man 2 came along, and all I could say about that was "eh". Everything that the first film did went above and beyond, unlike the second. This is a film in between. What it does well, it does really well, other things are merely passable. Robert Downey Jr is Tony Stark. No contest, this man cannot do wrong with this role at all. Gwyneth Paltrow and Don Cheadle did good for the roles that they had. Ben Kingsley is the highlight of the film, I won't tell you why, but when I think of Iron Man 3 I think of Ben Kingsley. Now, one of the biggest flaws of the film is that while it does have some huge plot twists, (These are really good ones too) one in particular, hilarious when it happened, crashed and burned, when you see it you will know why. It failed. However, it doesn't sacrifice the good in the film. If you saw the Avengers... you probably already saw this one, but if you're a skeptic when it comes to this series, give it a try, it will be worth your while.
The Great Gatsby
(2013)
Just read the book guys
12 May 2013
After reading the Great Gatsby last summer, I really enjoyed it. The themes were powerful, the characters were compelling, and the plot was really well thought out. I really recommend it if you haven't read it as a freshman year novel study. Now, I thought Leonardo DiCaprio is the perfect choice for Gatsby, he is a great actor that really has the range to take on the role. However, the writing makes what made Gatsby endearing, awkward and homo erotic, and somewhat mentally handicapped. Tobey Maguire does a fine job as Nick Carraway, and Joel Edgerton does well as Tom Buchanan. Yet, the real letdown for me was Carey Mulligan as Daisy. No one wants to see a weak female character, well at least I don't. She does OK performance wise but, yet again she was written awkwardly. It makes her unlikable, plain and simple, you want her to die at the end, not Gatsby. I have to admit, I'm not a fan of Baz Luhrman's directing. I have not seen Moulin Rouge, but I do not want to, mostly because his 'modern twists' are a major distraction to the time period the theme is supposed to be set in. I kept hearing mellowed down pop songs. However, the one thing that he gets right are the visuals, this film is visually stunning, which is the best thing I can say about an adaption of such a compelling novel as the Great Gatsby. If you want a more rewarding experience-read the book.
Inception
(2010)
A near-perfect example of a near-perfect film
4 May 2013
Where could I possibly begin for a movie like this? This is one of the best films of recent memory, hands down. With the Dark Knight, it completely blew away expectations, with Inception, there was a bar to raise, and Nolan knew very well that he had to raise it. The result is a higher class of film. The story, where some may find confusing, I find very compelling. But it is a very heartless movie, nothing is done out of kindness or love, well not in the right way or for the right reasons at least. The characters know there is a job to be done that needs to be done and that is what makes this film comes full circle for me, and when that happens, that is all you can ask for. Another thing I credit besides the striking visuals, talented writing is the incorporation of Leonardo DiCaprio. It is a nice addition to have an A-lister in such a compelling role as his. It is a beautiful thing when all these elements come together, which makes this film a must-watch.
The Shawshank Redemption
(1994)
A powerful, wrenching experience
2 May 2013
This film, if it isn't one of the greatest of all time, at least I can say it is one of the greatest I've ever seen. This is a must-recommend, because to be honest, this is one of the many movies a movie lover must see before they die. It is not just a great film, but a great experience. And it is quite the experience! Morgan Freeman gives the performance of his career in this film. I give props to the director for making him narrate the film as well. He is just that great. Tim Robbins give a very underrated performance in this film. Freeman stole the show, but there was a certain subtlety of Robbins' that can't go without being recognized. Either way, both these men give their full effort into this film. There is a great atmosphere around this film as well, it's a subtle tone, as this is a subtle, (But great) film, but it changes when it needs to change, and it knows exactly when. As a matter-of-fact, what makes this movie great is that it knows exactly when it needs to do something powerful, thoughtful or sentimental, and to be honest as a moviegoer, that is all I can ask for.
The Shining
(1980)
Brilliant film making, at an unlikely genre
1 May 2013
Jack Nicholson's performance is as good as they say. Sorry, just wanted to get that out there. This man is a legend for a reason and, yes he is as good as they say. Stanley Kubrick does a phenomenal job of directing this flick. I give him credit for distancing from the book's plot. It really shows what his interpretation of the novel is and power to him. He made this material iconic and that is all one could ask for. Last, the only drawback this film has is the casting of Shelly Duvall. She was completely miscast for the role, it needed to be with someone who could give a more emotionally stable performance. She seemed like she was having a panic attack in a majority of the scenes that she was in. But that's a minor complaint compared to what a great film this is, I recommend it.
The Matrix
(1999)
Originally Decent
1 May 2013
I personally find the first Matrix movie a little overrated. It's not a bad movie, I would just recommend other sci-fi movies before this one. The premise is the film's strongest point. You are so intrigued by it that you have to see how this could possibly end. It does lead to some very exciting shoot outs and special effects, and Laurence Fishbourne's performance is something to be said about. Yet, it feels very muddled at times, like you get the feeling of "What did I just see?". Keanu Reeves is actually not as bad in this movie as one might think, but it's passable when compared to Morpheus. All in all, see it if you want to, because other people have much better things to say about it than I do.
Tell Your Friends