Fluke_Skywalker
Juni 2005 ist beigetreten
Willkommen auf neuen Profil
Unsere Aktualisierungen befinden sich noch in der Entwicklung. Die vorherige Version Profils ist zwar nicht mehr zugänglich, aber wir arbeiten aktiv an Verbesserungen und einige der fehlenden Funktionen werden bald wieder verfügbar sein! Bleibe dran, bis sie wieder verfügbar sind. In der Zwischenzeit ist Bewertungsanalyse weiterhin in unseren iOS- und Android-Apps verfügbar, die auf deiner Profilseite findest. Damit deine Bewertungsverteilung nach Jahr und Genre angezeigt wird, beziehe dich bitte auf unsere neue Hilfeleitfaden.
Abzeichen3
Wie du dir Kennzeichnungen verdienen kannst, erfährst du unter Hilfeseite für Kennzeichnungen.
Bewertungen1356
Bewertung von Fluke_Skywalker
Rezensionen1086
Bewertung von Fluke_Skywalker
I've never read the novel by Alexandre Dumas that this movie is based on, but given that the audiobook version of the former has a runtime north of fifty hours and the latter clocks in at just a smidge over two, I'm guessing that we're getting a severely truncated version here. It doesn't show in terms of the story feeling chopped up or incomplete, but it does really montage its way through the second act so that we can get to the revengn'. Oh well, no matter. It all works perfectly fine regardless.
There are pinpricks all over the hull of this ship, but they don't add up to a large enough hole to sink it. For instance, aside from Guy Pearce and Richard Harris, the film is woefully miscast. But the likes of Caviezel and Guzman make up for it with their genuine, energetic efforts. That goes a long way with me. It's like when you go to a fast food place and their workers are polite. Does it make the fries fresh or the shake machine work? No, but it does make the experience more pleasant.
This is far from a classic, but it seems like it's kinda been forgotten over the years, and that's a shame. It's old fashioned in the best sense of the word, and a nice enough respite from the CGI inflated garbage Hollywood mistakes for being "entertainment" these days.
There are pinpricks all over the hull of this ship, but they don't add up to a large enough hole to sink it. For instance, aside from Guy Pearce and Richard Harris, the film is woefully miscast. But the likes of Caviezel and Guzman make up for it with their genuine, energetic efforts. That goes a long way with me. It's like when you go to a fast food place and their workers are polite. Does it make the fries fresh or the shake machine work? No, but it does make the experience more pleasant.
This is far from a classic, but it seems like it's kinda been forgotten over the years, and that's a shame. It's old fashioned in the best sense of the word, and a nice enough respite from the CGI inflated garbage Hollywood mistakes for being "entertainment" these days.
It seems pretty clear now that the "Comic book" film is on its last legs. The combination of an oversaturated market married with a steep decline in quality has the genre about to join the Western in the mausoleum of pop culture. Can one great movie change that? No. A string of good to pretty good ones? Again, no. This is a nosedive that even Chuck Yeager couldn't pull out of. Enter: 'The Fantastic Four: First Steps', a film so mid, so meh, that your super power will need to be not falling asleep.
Ironically this is the fourth try at a live action F4 adaptation (If you include the Corman hoax from the early 90's, which I do). That's a whole lotta effort for an IP that really doesn't have much "cool" factor or cultural currency. But Marvel never met a toothpaste tube it couldn't squeeze dry, so here we are.
Filled with atrocious CGI f/x, a wafer-thin story and a total lack of emotional connection, the two best things I have to say about this movie are that it's short and that I enjoyed the retro futuristic visuals. That's it. Forgettable score. Poor casting. I could go on and on. Everything else here is a swing and a miss.
This isn't the worst movie in the increasingly inconsequential MCU, but it sure isn't good enough to act as a course correct for Disney's once Titanic brand.
Ironically this is the fourth try at a live action F4 adaptation (If you include the Corman hoax from the early 90's, which I do). That's a whole lotta effort for an IP that really doesn't have much "cool" factor or cultural currency. But Marvel never met a toothpaste tube it couldn't squeeze dry, so here we are.
Filled with atrocious CGI f/x, a wafer-thin story and a total lack of emotional connection, the two best things I have to say about this movie are that it's short and that I enjoyed the retro futuristic visuals. That's it. Forgettable score. Poor casting. I could go on and on. Everything else here is a swing and a miss.
This isn't the worst movie in the increasingly inconsequential MCU, but it sure isn't good enough to act as a course correct for Disney's once Titanic brand.
No film genre is more formulaic and cliche-ridden than sports, and to be sure F1 doesn't break any new ground. But formulas become cliches for one simple reason. They work.
The old saying "What's old becomes new again" definitely applies here. In an age where Hollywood continues to offer up the tired comic book film and unneeded and often unwanted remake, what audiences are thirsting for-even if they don't exactly know it-is a return to the red meat and potatoes "Good guy overcomes challenges and wins/saves the day." type of film. No capes flapping or heavy-handed messages. Just likeable people we can root for. It's so simple you wonder why studios can't grasp it. But hey, I'm just a paying customer. What do I know?
F1 is an appropriately fast-paced (if a tad bit over long) movie that is perfect for Summer movie season. It looks spectacular, eschewing the CGI cheats of so many Summer "event" films these days, and delivers white-knuckle action that feels tactile. Director Joseph Kosinski, who directed the excellent Top Gun: Maverick (a film that should have woken up Woke Hollywood and showed them how to make movies-and money-again), really knows how to make these kinds of films. I wish he'd been named director of the new Bond film instead of the overrated Denis Villeneuve and his soulless, joy-deficient style.
Like Top Gun's Tom Cruise, Pitt is one of our last real movie stars. He's surrounded here by a capable cast, but make no mistake this is his movie and he carries it across the finish line.
The old saying "What's old becomes new again" definitely applies here. In an age where Hollywood continues to offer up the tired comic book film and unneeded and often unwanted remake, what audiences are thirsting for-even if they don't exactly know it-is a return to the red meat and potatoes "Good guy overcomes challenges and wins/saves the day." type of film. No capes flapping or heavy-handed messages. Just likeable people we can root for. It's so simple you wonder why studios can't grasp it. But hey, I'm just a paying customer. What do I know?
F1 is an appropriately fast-paced (if a tad bit over long) movie that is perfect for Summer movie season. It looks spectacular, eschewing the CGI cheats of so many Summer "event" films these days, and delivers white-knuckle action that feels tactile. Director Joseph Kosinski, who directed the excellent Top Gun: Maverick (a film that should have woken up Woke Hollywood and showed them how to make movies-and money-again), really knows how to make these kinds of films. I wish he'd been named director of the new Bond film instead of the overrated Denis Villeneuve and his soulless, joy-deficient style.
Like Top Gun's Tom Cruise, Pitt is one of our last real movie stars. He's surrounded here by a capable cast, but make no mistake this is his movie and he carries it across the finish line.
Kürzlich durchgeführte Umfragen
182 Gesamtzahl der durchgeführten Umfragen