Change Your Image
jgq-26552
Reviews
Dark Souls III: Ashes of Ariandel (2016)
Beautiful, challenging, but a bit lacking in the number of bosses.
Goddamn is this DLC good! I felt like the areas of the main game really hit or miss, (as good as Ithryll and Lothric castle are, there are some really aweful areas too, like Ithryll dungeon and Smoldering lake). The beauty and complexity of Ariendel however is just amazing. There are a lot of diverse enemies, really great weapons and great level design. Although the base game was relatively linear, Ariendel has more of that dark souls 1 vibe of looping around in the area, expanding it, and unlocking shortcuts. It also has A few really interesting optional areas with some pretty tough enemies in combat encounters. Definetly take some extra time to look around the area. Although you can blaze to it in like 3-4 hours, and many people criticize it for being short, There are more optional areas that some-what make up for it.
(Spoiler-ish section, I talk about the bosses)
Personally, I'm a huge fan of the two bosses they added. There's one optional bus that many people don't like, but I found him to be a cool change of pace and a fun encounter with an interesting arena.
The final boss of this DLC see though, oh my god is it amazing! It has this way of ramping up difficulty while teaching you how to deal with its many faces throughout the fight. The visuals are incredible the challenge is fair yeah extremely high, (harder then anything in the base game, though that's pretty par for the course for dark souls DLC). Personally, The final boss for this DLC is my favorite in the series so far, And almost completely makes up for the lack of other bosses in this DLC. That being said, two bosses is not really that much, and I would've loved to see more, especially considering how good these two bosses were. But, quality over quantity as good, and the next DLC definitely didn't disappoint in the boss department.
R.I.P.D. (2013)
Men In Black, but not as good.
Just watch Men In Black, 1 and 3. This is just that, but worse.
Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016)
Cool action, but Otherwise really dumb.
Most of it was dumb and convoluted, and Came across as if it was trying really hard to be edgy, and it just juggled too many things.
It needed to be a Batman origin story for the DCU, and a Batman V Superman movie, and have Wonder Women and set up the Judtice league, and be a Lex Luther movie, and HAVE DOOMSDAY in it so it can COVER THE DEATH IF SUPERMAN!
That being said, the action with Batman usually looks really cool and the actual fight between Batman and Superman especially looks Awesome, (despite the fact that their MOMS HAVE THE SAME NAME and that's why they stop fighting). The action is cool enough for me to almost recommend this film, but there's just too many problems with the story and pacing since they needed to cram in so much into one movie.
Also, Batman's voice is really dumb.
The Master (2012)
Masterwork if Editing, Presentation and Character Studies.
The strongest aspect of this film is the way it presents its story. The soundtrack and editing do a great job at keeping the audience entertained during every minute of this movie. Most of the characters are very compelling, with the exception of the love interest, who wasn't given enough screen time to be anything more then a motivation for the lead, which is why I took off a star. The two leads are very compelling however, and really help to elevate the story. Most of the supporting characters are at least interesting to watch, and are held up by there interactions with the leads. (But I guess that's what "supporting character" means so I'm not complaining) The plot is not anything too special. It's a rather basic story about a man who hit rock bottom finding a shady new organization that promises to fix him. The plot doesn't need to be anything more then that though, as it's simple plot is easy enough to follow and keeps itself grounded in realism. It feels a bit uncoordinated and jumbled (for lack of a better word) towards the beginning, I believe that is intentional to put us in the mindset of the protagonist, who lives a very chaotic life. The acting really elevated this movie. Joaquin Phoenix gives one of the best performances I've ever seen, and lays out the groundwork for his performance in Joker. Philip Seymour Hoffman also gives a great performance as a sort of, (but not really for legal reasons) L. Ron Hubbard. The Cinematography of the film can be excellent at times, panning out into wide shots of beaches, deserts and Melon farms for longer drawn out screens while moving between faster close-ups to help set the tone. I know that sounds like basic movie-making, but it's done so much better here that I found it noteworthy. Overall, this film is a fantastic look into Scientology (please don't sue me), as well as a good Character study on its own, that I would highly recommend.