Logos_Removed
Iscritto in data dic 2002
Ti diamo il benvenuto nel nuovo profilo
I nostri aggiornamenti sono ancora in fase di sviluppo. Sebbene la versione precedente del profilo non sia più accessibile, stiamo lavorando attivamente ai miglioramenti e alcune delle funzionalità mancanti torneranno presto! Non perderti il loro ritorno. Nel frattempo, l’analisi delle valutazioni è ancora disponibile sulle nostre app iOS e Android, che si trovano nella pagina del profilo. Per visualizzare la tua distribuzione delle valutazioni per anno e genere, fai riferimento alla nostra nuova Guida di aiuto.
Distintivi3
Per sapere come ottenere i badge, vai a pagina di aiuto per i badge.
Recensioni18
Valutazione di Logos_Removed
In a supposedly existential and enlightened world this movie is something of an oddity. Slammed by controversy for being anti-Semitic (particularly, and perhaps ironically by the secular press), which is ridiculous as it would make the Bible anti-Semitic too.
What we have here is an account of historical fact with a little artistic licence. Great care has been taken to present the world of Jesus Christ as it really was. The people speak in the languages of the time, and the politics of the period are represented accurately. To have the film in these ancient languages and then sub-titled was a bold move and a stroke of genius because it makes the movie feel like a window on the past.
The cinematography was great and although Gibson uses the space on the big screen adeptly there was no feeling of it being epic (in the wide-screen millions of extras on the set sort of way). Naturally the portrayal of Christ's epic suffering was depicted in unflinching detail, which will remind people of just how much Christ suffered during the last hours of his life. Cleverly the movie shows a few flashback sequences showing that Jesus Christ was a human man, in some ways off-setting the unrelenting punishment and in some ways compounding the horror of it.
When I first heard about this movie the biggest controversy was that it was going to be in ancient languages and that there would be no sub-titles. Way back then it piqued my interest. The fact that Mel mainstream' Gibson was going to make a movie about the last hours of Christ in such a fashion made it a must see movie. And so it is. It is a classic and stands taller than any other religious film.
I cannot sign off without mentioning John Debney's score for the film. Especially the final piece of music as the end credits roll. The initial crescendo sounds confident, powerful, and like the choir of angels singing their praise to God. In a word, it is awesome. The music definitely gives this movie a lot of flavour, and helps draw out the emotions of the viewer without being patronising.
With this movie I got what I expected. I expected it to be great and it was. So often I am disappointed by movies I think will be great and then they turn out to be mediocre. A bold movie, for the reasons I previously mentioned. Congratulations to Mr Gibson for telling it how it was, and is.
10 out of 10.
What we have here is an account of historical fact with a little artistic licence. Great care has been taken to present the world of Jesus Christ as it really was. The people speak in the languages of the time, and the politics of the period are represented accurately. To have the film in these ancient languages and then sub-titled was a bold move and a stroke of genius because it makes the movie feel like a window on the past.
The cinematography was great and although Gibson uses the space on the big screen adeptly there was no feeling of it being epic (in the wide-screen millions of extras on the set sort of way). Naturally the portrayal of Christ's epic suffering was depicted in unflinching detail, which will remind people of just how much Christ suffered during the last hours of his life. Cleverly the movie shows a few flashback sequences showing that Jesus Christ was a human man, in some ways off-setting the unrelenting punishment and in some ways compounding the horror of it.
When I first heard about this movie the biggest controversy was that it was going to be in ancient languages and that there would be no sub-titles. Way back then it piqued my interest. The fact that Mel mainstream' Gibson was going to make a movie about the last hours of Christ in such a fashion made it a must see movie. And so it is. It is a classic and stands taller than any other religious film.
I cannot sign off without mentioning John Debney's score for the film. Especially the final piece of music as the end credits roll. The initial crescendo sounds confident, powerful, and like the choir of angels singing their praise to God. In a word, it is awesome. The music definitely gives this movie a lot of flavour, and helps draw out the emotions of the viewer without being patronising.
With this movie I got what I expected. I expected it to be great and it was. So often I am disappointed by movies I think will be great and then they turn out to be mediocre. A bold movie, for the reasons I previously mentioned. Congratulations to Mr Gibson for telling it how it was, and is.
10 out of 10.
This is a relatively entertaining heist movie abound with the commercial slick of Hollywood. The set pieces are suitably expensive, and the action sequences, although largely uninspired, are adequate. We don't expect great acting for a tongue-in-cheek film such as this but there are no real sparks in the interplay of the characters. The script doesn't sizzle and there really is no memorable dialogue to speak of. Edward Norton, who plays the villain, is on auto-pilot. Mark Wahlberg's performance is as charismatic as a 4 by 4 plank. The only character in the film I found entertaining was Lyle, played by Seth Green. Donald Sutherland, always a welcome sight, played little more than a cameo role
shame.
The final sequences with the Minis as they career around Los Angeles was a huge disappointment and a wasted opportunity to have a car chase sequence that could've been amongst the best in the annals of cinema history. It's not like the budget wasn't there, just the creative vision and inventive impetus.
On the plus side though the music was great. Graham Revell really injected some chic into the movie with his cool tunes. The film was expertly paced and managed to keep my interest from start to finish, but then that is the least we can hope for from the director of The Negotiator.
All in all not bad, but not good either. Worth watching if you're stuck for something to see but I wouldn't go out of your way to catch it.
5 out of 10.
The final sequences with the Minis as they career around Los Angeles was a huge disappointment and a wasted opportunity to have a car chase sequence that could've been amongst the best in the annals of cinema history. It's not like the budget wasn't there, just the creative vision and inventive impetus.
On the plus side though the music was great. Graham Revell really injected some chic into the movie with his cool tunes. The film was expertly paced and managed to keep my interest from start to finish, but then that is the least we can hope for from the director of The Negotiator.
All in all not bad, but not good either. Worth watching if you're stuck for something to see but I wouldn't go out of your way to catch it.
5 out of 10.
I didn't think that much of the original movie and so I wasn't expecting much from this overly hyped sequel. My expectations were sufficiently met.
I'm not a huge fan of the X-Men per say, but the comic and the current cartoon series are so much better than these movies. Perhaps it is because there is not enough scope to tell the whole story properly in the time of the movie. Perhaps it is the huge overuse of pretty standard special FX, which are more boring than dazzling these days. I suspect it has more to do with the general malaise in the screenplay itself. Although there was a story it seemed to be a case of connect the dots between the big set-piece sequences than a properly developed narrative. This gave the movie a bit of a directionless, aimless sort of feeling.
The photography was superb in a safe Hollywood sort of way but despite this in its favour the movie still lacked something important, namely a soul. There is a glut of Marvel comic heroes that have been brought to the screen of late and while I feel Daredevil and Spiderman are definite successes, the X-Men franchise is an absolute failure.
4 out of 10.
I'm not a huge fan of the X-Men per say, but the comic and the current cartoon series are so much better than these movies. Perhaps it is because there is not enough scope to tell the whole story properly in the time of the movie. Perhaps it is the huge overuse of pretty standard special FX, which are more boring than dazzling these days. I suspect it has more to do with the general malaise in the screenplay itself. Although there was a story it seemed to be a case of connect the dots between the big set-piece sequences than a properly developed narrative. This gave the movie a bit of a directionless, aimless sort of feeling.
The photography was superb in a safe Hollywood sort of way but despite this in its favour the movie still lacked something important, namely a soul. There is a glut of Marvel comic heroes that have been brought to the screen of late and while I feel Daredevil and Spiderman are definite successes, the X-Men franchise is an absolute failure.
4 out of 10.