2blackcats
Entrou em jan. de 2002
Bem-vindo(a) ao novo perfil
Nossas atualizações ainda estão em desenvolvimento. Embora a versão anterior do perfil não esteja mais acessível, estamos trabalhando ativamente em melhorias, e alguns dos recursos ausentes retornarão em breve! Fique atento ao retorno deles. Enquanto isso, Análise de Classificação ainda está disponível em nossos aplicativos iOS e Android, encontrados na página de perfil. Para visualizar suas Distribuições de Classificação por ano e gênero, consulte nossa nova Guia de ajuda.
Selos2
Para saber como ganhar selos, acesse página de ajuda de selos.
Avaliações8
Classificação de 2blackcats
Roger Ebert's infamous trashing of (then odd reversal and completely unwarranted praise for) this movie aside, any follow-up to Buffalo '66 deserves watching. And while the artsy crowd may enjoy just that: watching -- watching as the main character, Clay (Gallo), drives cross-country, aimlessly and endlessly for what seems like an eternity, there's just not enough substance to The Brown Bunny to make for anything other than a self-indulgent exercise from a once promising director. Sure, the shock value in the last minutes is, well, shocking, but is it enough to justify our suffering along with the main character through the rest of the film? Do yourself a favor: if curious to find out what all the fuss is about, fast forward your DVD on screen (8x setting should be fine) for roughly the first hour and ten minutes. Stop every once in a while to feel artsy and appreciate the ennui. Net result: you watch the movie in about one quarter the time. Trust me. You won't miss anything. As for the end? Well, let's just say Gallo, who wrote, produced, directed and stars, gets the most out of his leading lady. The ending will affect you. No doubt about that. But what effect it has? I guess that's what "art" is all about.
An homage to the classic Universal monsters of the 1930s and 40s, the opening ten minutes of Van Helsing - filmed in glorious black and white, and full of torch-toting villagers - are oddly reminiscent of Mel Brooks' Young Frankenstein. Both films play into a set of pop-culture expectations that we have of our beloved movie monsters; both recall a time in Hollywood where any combination of them - Dracula, Frankstein's monster, and/or the Wolf Man - was a sure way to put keisters in the seats. And where Brooks turned so adeptly to comedy with his homage, writer-director Stephen Sommers (The Mummy) here resurrects his particular forte: action and adventure. Indeed, once Van Helsing switches over to color, this special-effects laden juggernaut never lets up. And its many-monstered minutes - over 200 of them (minutes, that is [though there are seemingly just as many monsters]) - are a spectacle to behold.
Still, spectacle wears thin with a plot this threadbare. Seems Dracula is looking to use the Frankenstein monster to give life to an army of the undead, and (partial spolier) only the secret of the curse of the werewolf can stop him. Is it fun? Sure. In the title role, an athletic Hugh Jackman (X-Men) seems to be having a blast, and his equally agile co-star, Kate Beckinsale, appears much more comfortable fighting vampires than being one (as she did in the somewhat over serious and less entertaining Underworld). Perhaps what's missing here is something Lugosi, Karloff, and even Lon Chaney Jr. brought to the screen over half a century ago that the age of CGI often overshadows: that atmosphere and exposition are still important, especially when dealing with cinematic icons.
Still, spectacle wears thin with a plot this threadbare. Seems Dracula is looking to use the Frankenstein monster to give life to an army of the undead, and (partial spolier) only the secret of the curse of the werewolf can stop him. Is it fun? Sure. In the title role, an athletic Hugh Jackman (X-Men) seems to be having a blast, and his equally agile co-star, Kate Beckinsale, appears much more comfortable fighting vampires than being one (as she did in the somewhat over serious and less entertaining Underworld). Perhaps what's missing here is something Lugosi, Karloff, and even Lon Chaney Jr. brought to the screen over half a century ago that the age of CGI often overshadows: that atmosphere and exposition are still important, especially when dealing with cinematic icons.
Based upon the Dark Horse comic by Mike Mignola, directed by Guillermo del Toro (Blade II, Cronos), and starring Ron Perlman (Beauty and the Beast), Hellboy is one heck of a movie.
The oddest of heroes - a reluctant demon who, despite a stone hand, is all heart - Hellboy fights monsters and resurrected Nazis as part of a covert operation for the US government. Sound silly? It is, and that's its charm. Under del Toro's capable direction, the action is swift, the monsters are scary, and the atmosphere is otherworldly. But it is character that drives Hellboy's plot. Much of the credit goes to the actors behind the masks. Ron Perlman delivers humor and humanity to a part that easily could have been little more than camp. And even supporting players, like the amphibian psychic Abe Sapien (voiced with aplomb by Frasier's David Hyde Pierce) are fully fleshed.
Highly original and immensely entertaining, Hellboy sets a new standard for comic-book adaptations.
The oddest of heroes - a reluctant demon who, despite a stone hand, is all heart - Hellboy fights monsters and resurrected Nazis as part of a covert operation for the US government. Sound silly? It is, and that's its charm. Under del Toro's capable direction, the action is swift, the monsters are scary, and the atmosphere is otherworldly. But it is character that drives Hellboy's plot. Much of the credit goes to the actors behind the masks. Ron Perlman delivers humor and humanity to a part that easily could have been little more than camp. And even supporting players, like the amphibian psychic Abe Sapien (voiced with aplomb by Frasier's David Hyde Pierce) are fully fleshed.
Highly original and immensely entertaining, Hellboy sets a new standard for comic-book adaptations.