kat_777

Well I'm a big fan of Hollywood films. My father and I are adamant when it comes to selection of movies. We make sure the films we buy are worth collecting so that is how our collection of ten years is still narrowed to 600. Olympus has fallen was suggested by a close friend of my father's, who is a bigger movie critic. Okay then, time to press on. Movie starts with Gerard Butler's character miserably failing to save the first lady in a freak accident on a bridge. He is traumatized and even after 18 months he hasn't recovered from that guilt. Then we have a sudden invasion of terrorists from N. Korea with sophisticated demands. Thus the most protected building in the world has fallen. The American army which supposed to be the best in the world failed. The terrorist managed enter inside the president's emergency bunker and hold all necessary officials as hostages. Now that sounds familiar… like 1995 film air force one. The only difference is that in Air force one the president is the hero. Here we have a John McLane type character Mike Banning played By Gerard Butler who just ends up inside while fighting, gets emotional to see all his friends dead on ground and sneaks inside the white house unnoticed and reached the oval office. I enjoyed the movie. It was a good 'thriller' as we sit at the edge of our seats until the whole thing just wraps up. But here are the logical reasons why this movie is less impressive.

1. Generally the whole movie centers around this 'John McLane' named Mike Banning, and it if wasn't for him then the officials and everyone were helpless before the 40 terrorist as it is said. And he reaches in purely by luck and if he didn't? Generally Morgan freeman's characters and other people outside are not doing anything to save the president all the plans they make simply backfire them. 2. Surely is this movie is trying to show what happens when the 'Olympus' falls? With all the others hatred towards America like the terrorists here or the Middle East people celebrate when they heard about WH attack. 3. Sacrificing a nation for one. Sacrificed by those who all follow vows "We won't go down without a fight" and "America don't negotiate with terrorists". Well this is not negotiating, this is a direct order given by the terrorists so the officials have no other choice. 4. Giving the terrorist what they need will never save what they are holding as hostage, that is reality and above logic every terrorist one way or the shows that at the end. 5. Dumb fight scenes. Other secret service agents cannot fight the way Butler's character can. Well he has dealt with people like before haven't they?

Overall this movie is about a one man army fight against a terrorist group that couldn't be defeated by a nation's fleet. Well the teens will enjoy it due to the action pack.

4/10

I liked the hunger games book. It was pretty thrilling and edge of the seat. The characters and the emotions were well depicted. But the movie could have been lot better. I felt as if they started it quickly and ended it just as. But some portions were better than the book though. The reaping scene for example, then the district 11 riot. Jennifer Lawrence delivered an effortless performance for the movie. Josh Hutcherson managed to look different from his usual chocolate boy teenage roles. Woody Harrelson was also in his usual standard. Other than the Rue's farewell score, there was nothing much on the film that makes one remember the hunger games. I wished James Newton Howard could have added something more and better in the movie.The song Abraham's daughter was very haunting and vibrant. Overall the movie was quiet enjoyable and re watchable but it just could have been better. The climax was not up to the mark. 7/10