Stealth-5
feb 2001 se unió
Te damos la bienvenida a nuevo perfil
Tenemos algunas actualizaciones en proceso y algunas funciones no estarán disponibles temporalmente mientras mejoramos tu experiencia. El enlace versión anterior será accesible después del 14/7. Sigue atento para el próximo relanzamiento.
Distintivos2
Para saber cómo ganar distintivos, ve a página de ayuda de distintivos.
Reseñas96
Clasificación de Stealth-5
Sitting at home, watching a trailer for the "Village" - i saw what seemed to be a cool horror film. I sensed atmosphere, i sensed suspense, i sensed fear, i sensed horror....I SENSED WRONG! You must question though from the same guy that bought you the fantastic "The 6th Sense"- and seeing the trailer you'd really expect it to be on par with it- but the 6th sense does RINGS around "The Village".
There's been a deep absence of horror in cinema recently, after the whole slasher moment (1995-2000)- i noticed a calm in all forms of horror...Oh and was i hungry for more horror. I decided to go check out the village and i cant say too much besides what a GREAT disappointment. The trailer is the most misleading thing you will lay your eyes upon. The story consists of a village in the woods that is surrounded by the myth of creatures that lurk in the woods- its simple...Don't cross their neck of the woods- and they wont cross yours. It sounds like it has premise to be something scary.
M. Night Shyamalan is FAMOUS for his plot twists and turns, but oh boy was someone trying a little TOO hard here. There's trying and trying too hard! He did that right here. Although "The Village" had a decent cast and some very good acting, you will find yourself falling asleep in no time. If you love horror and suspense- this is NOT your film. The film is more or less a soppy love story between the villages hero and a blind girl. It was so funny how about half way through the film people were getting really impatient with the film.
I wont say "The Village" was a BAD film because it wasn't. It just wasn't what it was made out to be and it WILL disappoint many people. The cinematography is truly beautiful, the acting is fine, actors are good- but it loses points for being boring, slow paced and when it came to "revealing" the monsters that was by far hilarious. All in all "The Village" is a film that lies to its audience- read more below.
ACTORS: The actors are good. Newcomer Bryce Dallas Howard is a GREAT actress, Joaquin Phoenix played his part well. There were a few other famous faces- including Sigourney Weaver who in my opinion didn't match her role. The acting was fine in general and that wasn't the problem with the film.
SCRIPT: Pretty poor. This film tries to rely on a "twist" to be its saving grace, but its terrible how it just goes from one "twist" to another, they go way too far with all these twists and turns, in the end it feels like a rushed confused film. You can see the whole quality of the film really dies down in the last 30 minutes. More mystery, more suspense would have been great, less talk and pointless nonsense such as the "bad color" etc.
CINEMA: Cinematography was in general great. The whole village looked fantastic, people were dressed in period clothing. Long sweeping grass, scary woods- i cant deny the good job on the cinematography, its an attractive film thats for sure.
HORROR: A REAL lack luster here ladies and gentlemen. As i said this is more like a romantic film than a horror film. There is ONE scene which will give you a little bit of a jump and thats about it, for the other 90 minutes expect to be twitching while getting impatient and drifting off to sleep when you finally have had enough.
MUSIC: The music in the film was pretty good. Atmospheric in parts, well timed. I cant really complain about the music.
OVERALL: "The Village" is something you REALLY can not judge from its cover. Although everything about it spells out "HORROR FILM"- it could never be so wrong. I find the Village to make a great Romance film, a deep drama maybe- but in no way shape or form is this a horror film, it is not scary at all- horror fans will be totally disappointed. A misleading trailer will really rake in some good dough- but expect it to rake in some bad reviews and a loss of respect to M. Night Shyamalan.
** / ***** (2 out of 5 stars)
There's been a deep absence of horror in cinema recently, after the whole slasher moment (1995-2000)- i noticed a calm in all forms of horror...Oh and was i hungry for more horror. I decided to go check out the village and i cant say too much besides what a GREAT disappointment. The trailer is the most misleading thing you will lay your eyes upon. The story consists of a village in the woods that is surrounded by the myth of creatures that lurk in the woods- its simple...Don't cross their neck of the woods- and they wont cross yours. It sounds like it has premise to be something scary.
M. Night Shyamalan is FAMOUS for his plot twists and turns, but oh boy was someone trying a little TOO hard here. There's trying and trying too hard! He did that right here. Although "The Village" had a decent cast and some very good acting, you will find yourself falling asleep in no time. If you love horror and suspense- this is NOT your film. The film is more or less a soppy love story between the villages hero and a blind girl. It was so funny how about half way through the film people were getting really impatient with the film.
I wont say "The Village" was a BAD film because it wasn't. It just wasn't what it was made out to be and it WILL disappoint many people. The cinematography is truly beautiful, the acting is fine, actors are good- but it loses points for being boring, slow paced and when it came to "revealing" the monsters that was by far hilarious. All in all "The Village" is a film that lies to its audience- read more below.
ACTORS: The actors are good. Newcomer Bryce Dallas Howard is a GREAT actress, Joaquin Phoenix played his part well. There were a few other famous faces- including Sigourney Weaver who in my opinion didn't match her role. The acting was fine in general and that wasn't the problem with the film.
SCRIPT: Pretty poor. This film tries to rely on a "twist" to be its saving grace, but its terrible how it just goes from one "twist" to another, they go way too far with all these twists and turns, in the end it feels like a rushed confused film. You can see the whole quality of the film really dies down in the last 30 minutes. More mystery, more suspense would have been great, less talk and pointless nonsense such as the "bad color" etc.
CINEMA: Cinematography was in general great. The whole village looked fantastic, people were dressed in period clothing. Long sweeping grass, scary woods- i cant deny the good job on the cinematography, its an attractive film thats for sure.
HORROR: A REAL lack luster here ladies and gentlemen. As i said this is more like a romantic film than a horror film. There is ONE scene which will give you a little bit of a jump and thats about it, for the other 90 minutes expect to be twitching while getting impatient and drifting off to sleep when you finally have had enough.
MUSIC: The music in the film was pretty good. Atmospheric in parts, well timed. I cant really complain about the music.
OVERALL: "The Village" is something you REALLY can not judge from its cover. Although everything about it spells out "HORROR FILM"- it could never be so wrong. I find the Village to make a great Romance film, a deep drama maybe- but in no way shape or form is this a horror film, it is not scary at all- horror fans will be totally disappointed. A misleading trailer will really rake in some good dough- but expect it to rake in some bad reviews and a loss of respect to M. Night Shyamalan.
** / ***** (2 out of 5 stars)
Scary Movie 3 was a film i was somewhat waiting for. I guess it was just the guilt of watching Scary Movie 2 and just hoping..Praying that things would go better for the series as the first film was excellent. Well as Scary Movie 3 played, i was pleasantly suprised with the introduction it was very well done with Pamela Anderson and Jenna McCarthy. Don't let that fool you though, remember the Classic Scary Movie 2 "Intro"-? We all know what happened after that. As the film progressed half an hour on i wasn't enjoying it so much, things slowed down, very luckily things started to pick up. Scary Movie 3 spoofed films like 8-Mile, The Ring, The Others, Signs , The Matrix and alot more.
Now lets move on to some topics...Like the PLOT! What plot? There was none, then again it possibly had a bit more of a storyline than Scary Movie 2 and that aint saying much. There were a few laugh out loud movies in the film, but they were few and far between. Many jokes also were flat yet that was acceptable seeming it was a spoof right? Not quiet- this was involved with the Zucker brothers, they were legendary with the Naked Gun and Airplane series and this film is a prime example of how their outlook on comedy has changed- its just not the same.
Many of the jokes were over-used and tiring like everyone being clumbsy, the boy always getting hit by an object, people hitting their heads on things, people falling over, people getting hit. It's just not funny after a few times. Scary Movie 3 had a great cast, fantastic to see Anna Farris back who is the only sign of promise in this trilogy. Some guest stars like Macy Gray, Ja Rule, Fat Joe, Denise Richards, Charlie Sheen and the classic Leslie Nielson. The acting was decent, thign is with this genre of film bad acting could easily be used as an excuse to simply be a "Spoof" maybe thats why Pamela Anderson was in it for a good 10 minutes. Lets check details below.
ACTING: The acting was nothing more than what i expected it to be. Anna Farris kept her awesome persona in this film and really knows how to play Cindy. The rest of the cast did well, yet Leslie Nielson seemed somewhat tired of his role. Pamela Anderson was there, and she DID Act- but note there was plenty of Clevage coming from her to keep you male critics all hush hush.
ACTORS: The cast in Scary Movie 3 had to have to best casting out of the entire series. Although there are no signs of the Wayan Brothers, or classic characters like "bobby"- things do change. The little boy was great. Plenty of faces in this film, most though are underused and have cameos, but that can never damage a film.
SCRIPT: The concept is ridiculous and its like they just thought of the plot after writing it and linked up the 2 main spoofs together. There are quiet a few gags to laugh out but only a very few are truely laugh out loud moments. They put in too much of the same thing in this script, like characters being really clumbsy that got annoying. The ending was very TYPICAL and quiet predictable and why did Cindy Marry that guy after knowing him for around 2 days? Oh and BRENDA got killed again- don't be fooled though she is eternal.
CINEMA: Cinematography was well..."Different". This film seemed to have a different approach, directed by different people and that really made the film seem different i almost couldn't tell this was part of the Scary Movie franchise, it looked different. The ring scenes were well done. Otherwise Cinematography was quiet average they did a fairly good job when copying other films.
COMEDY: It was quiet funny but nothing you can call "GOOD". Reason being The Zucker brother could have done SO much better with the material they were given.Some scenes were hilarious like the Michael Jackson Incident, The Brenda Corpse Scene, The Blonde Jokes, Cindy being her silly self. Other moments fell nice and flat as i mentioned...Cindy could be clumbsy but why does everyone else have to be? Be more original! The boy copping abuse was funny once and twice, but not fifty times. It WAS funnier than Scary Movie 2 and i did notice a lot less crude jokes in this one.
MUSIC: Not so much music used in SCary Movie 3. They used a very similar scene to Halloween/Exorcist. Otherwise there was barely any music to support the film, definately not a soundtrack anyone would want to hear or buy, i doubt it has any soundtrack they could have added some more music to give some scenes some more energy.
OVERALL: Well all in all, i wasn't exactly disappointed at the same time i wasn't very pleased. Its a netural subject, if you prefer more slapstick spoof you will enjoy Scary Movie 3 more than 1 and 2. If you prefer more sexy, crude jokes you would not like this very much. If you like a blend of both you will find this film quiet decent. Of course it could have been better but i read plenty of horrible reviews on this film before watching it, and some people really need to study film. This is far from being "THE WORST FILM EVER". Take it from me. Scary Movie 3 had it's moments and it was better than part 2 in the long shot- and that could only be positive- don't be too positive though. Scary Movie 3 has a different approach to each person, you will know which approach you have taken after viewing it. Enjoy!
** 1/2 (2 and a half out of five)
Now lets move on to some topics...Like the PLOT! What plot? There was none, then again it possibly had a bit more of a storyline than Scary Movie 2 and that aint saying much. There were a few laugh out loud movies in the film, but they were few and far between. Many jokes also were flat yet that was acceptable seeming it was a spoof right? Not quiet- this was involved with the Zucker brothers, they were legendary with the Naked Gun and Airplane series and this film is a prime example of how their outlook on comedy has changed- its just not the same.
Many of the jokes were over-used and tiring like everyone being clumbsy, the boy always getting hit by an object, people hitting their heads on things, people falling over, people getting hit. It's just not funny after a few times. Scary Movie 3 had a great cast, fantastic to see Anna Farris back who is the only sign of promise in this trilogy. Some guest stars like Macy Gray, Ja Rule, Fat Joe, Denise Richards, Charlie Sheen and the classic Leslie Nielson. The acting was decent, thign is with this genre of film bad acting could easily be used as an excuse to simply be a "Spoof" maybe thats why Pamela Anderson was in it for a good 10 minutes. Lets check details below.
ACTING: The acting was nothing more than what i expected it to be. Anna Farris kept her awesome persona in this film and really knows how to play Cindy. The rest of the cast did well, yet Leslie Nielson seemed somewhat tired of his role. Pamela Anderson was there, and she DID Act- but note there was plenty of Clevage coming from her to keep you male critics all hush hush.
ACTORS: The cast in Scary Movie 3 had to have to best casting out of the entire series. Although there are no signs of the Wayan Brothers, or classic characters like "bobby"- things do change. The little boy was great. Plenty of faces in this film, most though are underused and have cameos, but that can never damage a film.
SCRIPT: The concept is ridiculous and its like they just thought of the plot after writing it and linked up the 2 main spoofs together. There are quiet a few gags to laugh out but only a very few are truely laugh out loud moments. They put in too much of the same thing in this script, like characters being really clumbsy that got annoying. The ending was very TYPICAL and quiet predictable and why did Cindy Marry that guy after knowing him for around 2 days? Oh and BRENDA got killed again- don't be fooled though she is eternal.
CINEMA: Cinematography was well..."Different". This film seemed to have a different approach, directed by different people and that really made the film seem different i almost couldn't tell this was part of the Scary Movie franchise, it looked different. The ring scenes were well done. Otherwise Cinematography was quiet average they did a fairly good job when copying other films.
COMEDY: It was quiet funny but nothing you can call "GOOD". Reason being The Zucker brother could have done SO much better with the material they were given.Some scenes were hilarious like the Michael Jackson Incident, The Brenda Corpse Scene, The Blonde Jokes, Cindy being her silly self. Other moments fell nice and flat as i mentioned...Cindy could be clumbsy but why does everyone else have to be? Be more original! The boy copping abuse was funny once and twice, but not fifty times. It WAS funnier than Scary Movie 2 and i did notice a lot less crude jokes in this one.
MUSIC: Not so much music used in SCary Movie 3. They used a very similar scene to Halloween/Exorcist. Otherwise there was barely any music to support the film, definately not a soundtrack anyone would want to hear or buy, i doubt it has any soundtrack they could have added some more music to give some scenes some more energy.
OVERALL: Well all in all, i wasn't exactly disappointed at the same time i wasn't very pleased. Its a netural subject, if you prefer more slapstick spoof you will enjoy Scary Movie 3 more than 1 and 2. If you prefer more sexy, crude jokes you would not like this very much. If you like a blend of both you will find this film quiet decent. Of course it could have been better but i read plenty of horrible reviews on this film before watching it, and some people really need to study film. This is far from being "THE WORST FILM EVER". Take it from me. Scary Movie 3 had it's moments and it was better than part 2 in the long shot- and that could only be positive- don't be too positive though. Scary Movie 3 has a different approach to each person, you will know which approach you have taken after viewing it. Enjoy!
** 1/2 (2 and a half out of five)