Psycho Mantis
Joined Jun 2001
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews50
Psycho Mantis's rating
Young soon-to-be wizard Harry Potter lives a dreadful life with his mean step-parents, untill one day when a letter arrives. It says that Harry is a wizard and he should come to a school called Hogwarts to learn more. Eventually, Harry is on his way to the school, where lots of adventures await him.
"Harry Potter" has huge expectations on its shoulders, and I´m happy to say it lives up to them. But it should be added that I´m not a huge fan of the book, I read it and thought it was good, but I couldn´t really understand all the attention it has been given. But I have to say that Chris Columbus has created an excellent adaption, that includes the very best parts of the story and also remains faithful to J.K Rowling´s book. It has the same nice details as the book and it actually takes its time to develop the characters. The effects are mostly top-notch and the set-pieces are awesome. The climax is definitely the Quidditch match, this was made to be seen on the big screen!
If you think of how many child actors we have here, the acting is sensational! Daniel Radcliffe is perfect and just as I imagined Harry. However, he is easily outshined by ginger-haired Rupert Grint, who plays young comedian Ron Weasly, who provides the most laughs. But the real discovery of the kids is Emma Watson as bossy Hermione. You could tell after one minute of Ms Watson that she will be huge in the future! The older actors are perfectly cast as well. Richard Harris, Alan Rickman and Maggie Smith are solid, while Robbie Coltrane and John Hurt provide warmth.
The movie´s few problems is its length, I definitely don´t agree with those who thought it was to short. It loses tempo towards the end, and the finale is a disappointment. Another problem is that the book is not without its flaws from the very beginning. You could forgive it since it takes more than half of the movie to introduce the characters and the environments. Because after that comes a cheap story about a "Philosopher´s Stone" that feels relatively uninteresting. But you have to remember that this is the first episode of a long series. Looking forward to "The Chamber of Secrets" already.
4/5
"Harry Potter" has huge expectations on its shoulders, and I´m happy to say it lives up to them. But it should be added that I´m not a huge fan of the book, I read it and thought it was good, but I couldn´t really understand all the attention it has been given. But I have to say that Chris Columbus has created an excellent adaption, that includes the very best parts of the story and also remains faithful to J.K Rowling´s book. It has the same nice details as the book and it actually takes its time to develop the characters. The effects are mostly top-notch and the set-pieces are awesome. The climax is definitely the Quidditch match, this was made to be seen on the big screen!
If you think of how many child actors we have here, the acting is sensational! Daniel Radcliffe is perfect and just as I imagined Harry. However, he is easily outshined by ginger-haired Rupert Grint, who plays young comedian Ron Weasly, who provides the most laughs. But the real discovery of the kids is Emma Watson as bossy Hermione. You could tell after one minute of Ms Watson that she will be huge in the future! The older actors are perfectly cast as well. Richard Harris, Alan Rickman and Maggie Smith are solid, while Robbie Coltrane and John Hurt provide warmth.
The movie´s few problems is its length, I definitely don´t agree with those who thought it was to short. It loses tempo towards the end, and the finale is a disappointment. Another problem is that the book is not without its flaws from the very beginning. You could forgive it since it takes more than half of the movie to introduce the characters and the environments. Because after that comes a cheap story about a "Philosopher´s Stone" that feels relatively uninteresting. But you have to remember that this is the first episode of a long series. Looking forward to "The Chamber of Secrets" already.
4/5
In the sequel to the very successful summer-hit of 1999 "The Mummy", director Stephen Sommers has made everything bigger and, according to himself, better. I can´t say that I agree with "The Mummy Returns" being better than its predecessor, but this is still fun stuff.
Several years after their first adventure, Rick and Evelyn are back in Egypt to hunt for treasures. This time they have their ingenious son with them. After some trouble, they get home to London, but they´ve brought something with them that they shouldn´t have taken. Very soon an old friend of theirs is resurrected and the fun begins.
In "The Mummy Returns", lots of the comedy from part one has been removed in favor of more special effects. Because there are lots of those here. Too many, I would say. Sure, they are great to look at (except for one certain effect towards the end, shame on you ILM), and helps the movie to keep the pace up. But it feels like Stephen Sommers should have trusted more on his actors, and less on the effects.
The film has its moments, the Scorpion King not being one, and the fun rarely stops. The actors do a good job with the material they have, and it´s nice to see the beautiful actress Patricia Velasquez in a bigger role this time around. This is one of the better sequels I´ve seen in a long time.
3/5
Several years after their first adventure, Rick and Evelyn are back in Egypt to hunt for treasures. This time they have their ingenious son with them. After some trouble, they get home to London, but they´ve brought something with them that they shouldn´t have taken. Very soon an old friend of theirs is resurrected and the fun begins.
In "The Mummy Returns", lots of the comedy from part one has been removed in favor of more special effects. Because there are lots of those here. Too many, I would say. Sure, they are great to look at (except for one certain effect towards the end, shame on you ILM), and helps the movie to keep the pace up. But it feels like Stephen Sommers should have trusted more on his actors, and less on the effects.
The film has its moments, the Scorpion King not being one, and the fun rarely stops. The actors do a good job with the material they have, and it´s nice to see the beautiful actress Patricia Velasquez in a bigger role this time around. This is one of the better sequels I´ve seen in a long time.
3/5
"Memento" is definitely a different experience. Don´t worry about anybody giving the ending away, because in "Memento" that´s where the story begins.
Guy Pearce plays Leonard Shelby, a man that has a short-term memory loss, he can´t remember things that happened only moments ago. That´s why he takes pictures of everyone he gets involved with, and make tattoos all over his body, so that he can remember who he can trust. He does this because his wife has been murdered, and he is determined to track down the killer for vengeance...
As hinted above, the story in "Memento" is told backwards, it begins with the ending and ends with the beginning. It might sound that you can get lost rather easy here, but luckily the whole concept is easier than it sounds to follow. And what a brilliant one it is.
Newcomer Christopher Nolan is clearly a director to watch in the future, he has created one of the most original movies in a very long time, and it´s a very good one too. The acting is also great, Guy Pearce is remarkably good in the leading role. This man is clearly smart when it comes to picking jobs. Carrie-Anne Moss is as brilliant as she is beautiful and Joe Pantoliano more and more stands out as one of the most underrated actors today.
"Memento" has an intriguing story, and the whole backwards-concept makes it even more enjoyable. This is one of those movies which might get better each time you watch them. That´s why I simply can´t wait to see this one again.
5/5
Guy Pearce plays Leonard Shelby, a man that has a short-term memory loss, he can´t remember things that happened only moments ago. That´s why he takes pictures of everyone he gets involved with, and make tattoos all over his body, so that he can remember who he can trust. He does this because his wife has been murdered, and he is determined to track down the killer for vengeance...
As hinted above, the story in "Memento" is told backwards, it begins with the ending and ends with the beginning. It might sound that you can get lost rather easy here, but luckily the whole concept is easier than it sounds to follow. And what a brilliant one it is.
Newcomer Christopher Nolan is clearly a director to watch in the future, he has created one of the most original movies in a very long time, and it´s a very good one too. The acting is also great, Guy Pearce is remarkably good in the leading role. This man is clearly smart when it comes to picking jobs. Carrie-Anne Moss is as brilliant as she is beautiful and Joe Pantoliano more and more stands out as one of the most underrated actors today.
"Memento" has an intriguing story, and the whole backwards-concept makes it even more enjoyable. This is one of those movies which might get better each time you watch them. That´s why I simply can´t wait to see this one again.
5/5