peramneus

Trust me, I really wanted to love this movie. But I didn't. I expected that I would love this movie. But really, who could? OK , I will readily admit that I am poser that wants to appear as smart and intellectual and all that. And as such, this movie would have been great for my image. But it just isn't a good movie.

I give it a 4/10, because it is very visually appealing. If you want to watch it, watch it for the photography. It is really quite beautiful at times.

Now to the bad parts: 1. The plot. Seems to have been written in about 20 minutes. 2. The humor. It's non-existent. The movie is labeled as a comedy, and I know that french humor is peculiar at times. But even for french standards, this isn't fun. 3. The characters. Some of the characters, the main characters especially, do not come off as real persons, but are rather sketchy, like cartoons. (Other minor characters does appear as real persons, or more precisely, as real a**hole*, which automatically leads me to the next:) 4. Character interactions. A lot of the characters show no trace of empathy toward other characters. In the book "does androids dream of electric sheep" this is a central part of the discussion on androids. On the portrayal in the book of the androids, of these human-like creatures, but totally without empathy, and who cannot even understand the concept of empathy, is such a powerful blow in the face of the reader. This is totally lost in the movie "blade runner", and instead they came up with something like "after some time, you start to develop feelings", but I think the real reason the replicants in "blade runner" have emotions and empathy, is that it is really very difficult to portray human-like characters as unempathic, emotionless robots. But Olivier Assayas actually succeeds. Which is impressive, sure, but in this context, it is also rather weird. Maybe he wants to send a message? I don't know. What I know is, I don't like this movie. I think it is shallow, while it wants to appear as really smart. However, I really wanted to see the vampire movie they were recording!

This is my one-year-old son's favorite show, and I can understand why. It is in fact the only TV-program he is willing to sit still for five minutes and watch. Even as an adult, I can enjoy it (and let's face it: a lot of children's shows are not enjoyable, they are incredibly boring and a gruesome pain to have to endure). I think part of the appeal is that each episode is well written. Part of the beginnings and part of the endings are always similar, taking place in the "real" world. Similar enough for recognition, but not close enough for repetition. Then, the main events takes place in a world of the main character's imagination, using the same locations and same colorful characters. All in all, each episode is something new, but still very familiar. Small children seem to enjoy that a lot. Further it is visually pleasing, the animations have a very distinctive style, and the music fits the visual style and the story very well. I get the impression that the creators of this show really enjoy what they are doing.

Some of the reviews for this movie leaves me dumbfounded. I mean: What did some people actually expect? And why did they see it in the first place?

This is a movie about flying sharks, attacking the people of Los Angeles. If you think that sounds like a great concept for an entertaining one-and-a-half hour, watch the movie! If you think the idea of a movie about flying sharks is just stupid, well, just don't watch the movie! It is really that simple.

I disagree with most of the reviewers: This is not a particularly bad movie. And it is not one of these movies that is so bad that it is good. This is a decent, and quite entertaining, disaster movie. If you like the genre, there is a good chance you will like this movie. Special effects are OK, filming is good, acting performances are not overly annoying (John Heard is even good), and I had no troubles whatsoever following the plot (but maybe that makes me a genius).