borkoboardo Reviews

Honest Trailers (2012– )

Very original idea that has become a little stale

[8/10 · 16 October 2015]

Who cannot remember his/her first honest trailer? What a blast it was! From that moment on it's a catching-up-game to watch them all.

Honest trailers to me is very comparable to South Park - which also had very good and most of all diverse ideas at the beginning but after they had to produce season after season it became very formulaic and "by the books". The same thing happened to honest trailers - one might argue it is because I'm now used to the concept. But still, when I watch older Honest Trailers the laughing comes instantly back.

There may be more than just one reason for this. One is definitely the choice of movies as the makers primarily choose current blockbusters or all-time-classic blockbusters which are very formulaic in their nature, leaving not much room for parody. Therefore most argumentations are based on the same flaws in those movies, and subsequently very similar.

Also Honest Trailers work mostly on bad films which are made with good intentions but fail to convince. But the fans demand Honest Trailers for basically every current blockbuster (good and bad) and so it also happens that movies are picked which are actually very good (Fight Club, Forrest Gump, Ang Lee's Hulk, etc) to create an artificial parody about points which aren't very just.

Still, the idea is highly original and here and there a good one pops up - not as frequent in quality as it used to but therefore in quantity. Almost every Screen Junkies box out a new one. Maybe that's also a reason for the decline in quality, but I don't give up hope! I'm still always happy when a new one comes out!

The Dark Valley (2014)

A fresh idea filled with (too) many flaws

[5/10 · 23 February 2014]

I think it's best to start with what this film does best.

The cast is amazing - every face is one to remember and each do their job very well. The look of this film is also very credible and captures the stunning scenery in a very professional way. I also had nothing to complain about the editing, grading and overall pacing of "Das finstere Tal" - it bears nothing unusual which might jeopardize your enjoyment...

And that's exactly the problem with it. While I was let to believe to see something new I got a very uncreative recycling of things I already know and not necessarily like.

First of all - this "guy comes back to a village for a killing spree to avenge his family" is something we have seen I don't know how many times. Furthermore I didn't get caught by surprise at ANY moment since the story is extremely linear and doesn't contain even one twist.

Film experts always tell me that a great movie shows character development, meaning that at the beginning we have a protagonist who grows over the course of the story and is somehow wiser at the end. This just doesn't happen here. Guy comes, does his business, and leaves, full stop.

I have seen this film at a theater with a friend from Austria. He told me that basically each actor speaks a different dialect (which I started noticing too after he told me). That's interesting since they're all from the same small village. At some point it's almost too obvious, especially when even brothers speak a different "language". This is really sad because it is something that the director was particularly proud of.

The music, well, and there was the music. The low points are definitely beginning and end when some poppy songs are played that aren't even good but rather corny and generic - but one look at the credits hints that one composer is related to the director (so one can imagine how that happened). The rest of the music is an ambitious attempt to sound international - not bad, but not really good either.

Sam Riley really shines and glues this film together. His German is quite credible and he delivers a performance that probably even exceeds the script - which is fairly generic and, like I already said, very linear.

"Das finstere Tal" is further proof that Austrian cinema is becoming a player on international ground. It looks good, feels good and follows known traditions and standards. But on the other hand this is also the fatal flaw of this film - it doesn't surprise at any point, contains no twist and doesn't transcend anything we have seen until now.

We Ride: The Story of Snowboarding (2013)

Fans will love it!

[4/10 · 26 February 2013]

It's a difficult one - the history of snowboarding! A lot has happened over the past 30, actually 40 years, and it's an ambitious task to pack it all into a full feature film.

It becomes very clear very soon that the makers didn't have much information on their side. That's why they chose to rather focus on key people than the actual story. Unfortunately this is the moment when it becomes quite distorted - I assume the 1980's had more innovators than just Burton and Sims and I also believe that there have been more influential riders than Terry Kidwell, Shaun Palmer and Craig Kelly. In the first segment though there are some very interesting elements regarding things like halfpipe or early contests.

From the 1990's part on the storyline becomes pretty chaotic, switching focus very often without a visible connection. I'm missing a lot of key events and explanations about certain topics - instead the film assumes that the viewer already knows it. It also spends a lot of time just talking about how awesome snowboarding is but can't support the heavy statements with vital background information.

On top the production standards are pretty low which doesn't give it that big picture feeling and makes it hard to watch at some points.

If it had been called "The history of snowboarders" then it would have gotten 7 stars as it is more a collection of mini biographies than an actual history documentary. But with this premise it rather misses the point. Too bad!

The Art of Flight (2011)

As HD as it gets...

[6/10 · 16 December 2011]

Just to warm up: This is definitely the most expensive, beautiful and technically perfect snowboard film I have ever seen (and yes, I have seen many).

The good things first: Already the Intro Logo animations make clear: there is a LOT of money in this film. And fortunately it went into the hands of someone like Travis Rice, one of the riders who push snowboarding to the limit and beyond. This time it's not one, not two, but up to three helicopters and other filming aides that help making an impressive portrayal of the sceneries and of course, the riding. And make no mistake - this is snowboarding at its very best AND core. It is a delight to watch these people do what they do best and the cinematography underlines the challenge of the actions presented. In fact we see things never seen before in the world of snowboarding (even in sports). The picture is super HD, the slow-mo's are extreme to the max, the post production is massive, the music works and the motion graphics & special effects fit in just perfectly.

Now to the inevitable: Please note, I'm reviewing a film here (not a person or the athletic abilities of someone). When "The Art Of Flight" is finished and the lights in the theater are turned on you feel a little empty. Yes, what has just been shown is definitely top notch state of the art, but as a film TAOF doesn't work - at all. In fact there isn't much of a "film" to review here but rather a long snowboard music video flick with no content except for the riding and the extensive use of the RED camera with super slow motion. It's nice to see snow-particles in HD falling at a very very very slow speed but after the 50th time it gets kinda boring and appears like "hey, look how great and expensive our camera is". The story, OK, now we get to the core - there is no story, no conclusion, no real insight (ok, the injury part is interesting but not mind opening) and no character development. It's a couple of riders who have the opportunity to travel to very remote places to snowboard and that's about it. And I really had to laugh at the Marc McMorris shot towards the end because he only appears for a few seconds - to perform the latest state of the art trick, his 1440 Triple Cork. At that point it almost seems like TAOF wants to show off by saying "Hey, and look, we got the latest trick as well".

The Art Of Flight is technically impressing, no doubt. But when it's over it's over because the makers failed to produce a real film and chose to make an overlong snowboard music video.

Four Lions (2010)

Are we ready already?

[6/10 · 1 October 2011]

First of all, big respect to the makers of this film for the courage of bringing up this topic and furthermore risking more than just their reputation.

When it comes to terrorism nowadays you're walking on thin ice if you as a filmmaker want to cover it. I'm not sure if the timing is right but I was eager to see this film to get a bigger picture. I was very divided at the end. Why?

The first thing I thought of was "What would/will people e.g. from the Middle East say/think if they saw this?" In my opinion they would have a right to be very upset. But if you examine this movie a little closer it gets split into a lot of different levels. In fact this film is not about terrorism itself - it's the story of four mislead friends. Omar, Faisal, Barry, & Waj are actually enjoying a good integrated life in England, yet they feel being corrupted by the Western civilization they live in. They push each other with the idea of revolution (Jihad) and go on a mission: to sacrifice themselves in a suicide bomb attack.

Furthermore it is a fact that there are many "homegrown terrorist cells" out there who like to associate themselves with strong words like "Jihad", "Al-Qaeda" or something related. Most of them look and act a lot like the ones portrayed in this film. I'm thankful for this unmasking of current global politics that has been going on since 2001. We are getting pumped up with fear every day - the media, politicians, councils, experts, even advertisements warn us about the constant danger of international terrorism. And here comes a movie that takes a lot of hot air out of this issue.

Terrorists are human(s) too. Have these two words ever been used in one sentence before (except in the ones of human rights groups)? This film follows a group of young radical Islamists that seeks out to destroy something for the wrong reasons. But just by being mislead you don't automatically loose your heart and soul. I think the makers underline this in a very romantic but still effective and honest way. If you go further you also start wondering about the full legitimacy of the treatment of (supposed) terrorists nowadays. This film breaks into a new realm because our news suggest a very different picture of radical fundamentalists which has been burnt into our mind.

In conclusion: It is very brave to deal with this topic. It is even braver to portray a terror cell as a bunch of fanatic idiots. But then again it draws a clear line between Islam and Islamism. I was confused first - but the more I think of it, the more I agree with the idea of raising this topic. I hope that the Muslim culture can differentiate between the protagonists of this film and themselves. Or maybe we will get a satirical Muslim film about stupid Westerners soon - and what an eye opening delight that could be!!!!

Der Herr Karl (1961 TV Movie)

Prototypical snapshot of the East-Austrian soul

[30 September 2011]

Who is Herr (Mister) Karl? It doesn't matter, he is no one, he's everyone - especially to those identifying with him - predominantly people from Vienna.

The film only contains one scene in which Mr Karl tells the story of his life, his opinions, his milestones, his women, his relationship with politics and history, his bad habits and his view on life. To most people from Eastern Austria his words associate straight with their souls - he reflected what many people thought about the world and themselves. There is no real story or plot, it's just a definition of a character, almost in audition style.

The film cleverly transports its messages which appear to be "common Austrian sense" - they know everything but don't want to get involved into politics, they can do anything but refuse to make real aims, they have experienced everything but still hardly ever adapt anything new.... The melancholy of time passing by is the essential core of perception and narration.

Being Austrian I know about the essence of (East) Austrian life that Mr Karl tries to get abroad. It describes the Viennese view on everything - it doesn't matter, does it? It's a little bit of this and a little bit of that but in the end it doesn't matter - you're alive, you've come a long way, you stepped over many dead bodies, who cares, your neighbour did it too, it doesn't really matter then... That's the ethics this film inhabits.

I personally don't like this kind of narration and ideals transported - To me it's something I frankly don't want to be reminded of. Respect to the actor, to this one-scene-no-cut-film- making technique and the courage to release this. On the other hand this has become stereotypical and a guiding factor for any "major" Austrian film to come - to reflect the very soul of its people - which is usually dark, shallow and conservative. I can see how this particular film started this trend, and until today it remains the blueprint of Austrian cinema. Still I can't identify myself with anything it tries to make a point about.

We Call It Techno! (2008 Video)

Not very versatile but interesting

[29 July 2011]

What happened after Techno got exported from Detroit and Chicago? This is what "We Call It Techno" tries to portray. It focuses on the development from 1988 to 1993 in Germany, predominantly in Berlin, Cologne and Munich.

There is no point in summarizing the content as it follows quite classic paradigms of documentary except for one thing: structure. It's a very loose construct of statements that hardly ever develops a common thread. It mainly tries to reflect the feelings, imaginations and motivations which organizers as well as party-goers enjoyed during this time. Soon it becomes clear that the makers not only want to educate but also spread some nostalgia - which commonly ends in "this is the greatest and most unique thing that ever happened". But as long as the viewer has his/her filters turned on one can extract some very interesting information out of it.

It is obviously not a professional documentary film - video, audio, storytelling and the constantly repeating cycle of comments, some footage and Techno tracks from that era underline this. It doesn't have any ups or downs nor a conclusion - it just moves on. But it is very ambitious and you cannot deny that the makers have a passion for what they try to describe. Unfortunately I can recommend this film only to fans of the genre, not because of the content but rather because of the chaotic structure and too many comments that are just not relevant and fill the piece up to 100min. The narrator is German (although he speaks in English), and that's also what he sounds like - you can't help but laugh.

I suppose in a couple of years a documentary will come along that will put this very interesting story into shape. But "We Call It Techno!" isn't that film I'm afraid.

Global Metal (2008)

walking on thin ice, yet managing to leap off before it cracks...

[7/10 · 20 June 2011]

It was all clear, after the roots and influences of metal were told in "Metal - A Headbanger's Journey" the next chapter was about to begin: What happens to Metal if it goes global?

I guess "ambitious" is the best word to describe the second metal documentary of Sam Dunn and Scott McFadyen - it will probably never win an Oscar - but even more hearts of metal fans. I am really thankful for the fact that the two didn't get carried away too much with certain topics. It is very interesting - especially from an anthropological point of view - to see how foreign cultures react to something almost completely western. Metal doesn't incorporate as many commercial aspects as other global trends, it transports different messages which are more genuinely reflected by the fans worldwide. I think the statement of the film is Bruce Dickinsons, who claims that kids all around the world reach a state in their development where they just want to get up, scream and go wild. It think this is the base for this film - it is normal that young people have a lot of compressed energy and anger to let loose. The times of the easter rabbit, santa clause and gnomes is over. They realize that reality is cold and tough - Metal offers them a valve to let release these feelings. It's nothing bad, in fact it should be considered a treatment. Let them go wild.

But in many cultures this behavior is not welcome and mostly not understood. This film tries to explore how kids (and adults) try to be understood and not be linked to extremist thoughts or low lives.

At some points it is explained very well, at some others it unintentionally mixes politics with culture. Although Metal definitely has certain political aspects the messages are interpreted in a very different way around the globe and unfortunately this documentary doesn't fully capture these impacts. The comments of some artists, especially Tom Araya from Slayer are rather dull and prove that some musicians have no idea of the real consequences their fans face in different parts of the world. Is this good or bad? The film leaves these decisions to the viewer...

I for myself really enjoyed this journey and though it has ups and downs it draws a very impressive momentum of a genre that has mostly chosen to go its own way.

Paul (2011)

Fresh from the assembly line...

[5/10 · 16 June 2011]

This is going to be short.

This is a serious example for once-quite-talented-writers-and-actors-gone-out-of-ideas. Paul is a very predictable, painfully boring and really unfunny movie. I understand there is people out there who buy the same story over and over again if it's coated with a new wrapper, but i see not even a good story recycled. In fact I am a fan of the duo Pegg/Frost - I thought this film would blow some fresh air into the quite tired generic sci-fi-genre nowadays. Unfortunately it didn't...

This is just a montage of gags mostly based on Star Wars (again), the side-story of Paul (yes, it's a side-story) is Paul himself, an alien needing humans to get from A to B. Simon Pegg and Nick Frost are those humans privileged to accompany this cool cynical 50-year-old comedy show host disguised as an alien that has some cool abilities. That said, Paul doesn't bring much alien features, except for looking like the stereotypical drawing that we all know.

Already as the story starts unfolding you assume what's going to happen - et voila, it happens (again). The dramaturgic strings are poorly written, the content aspects appear like the writers had a checkbook ticking off each single point, the story itself is very generic as there is nothing whatsoever new in this. Pegg and Frost are also just not really convincing as Sci-Fi-nerds and the humor is just so predictable, it hardly ever becomes surprising or funny. Maybe this is a trend reflecting US-American slapstick in its declining phase in the late 1990'ies - films became very "uninspired" at that point. Let's just forget about this one and give Pegg and Frost another chance, after what they've created in the past they deserve it.

South Park: You're Getting Old (2011) Season 15, Episode 7

This is deep!

[9/10 · 15 June 2011]

Trey Parker and Matt Stone probably haven't been that open in the last ten years...

This is not an episode, this is a message!

If you consider this and watch it again, it turns out very clearly. The makers of this show made a big statement: "Hey, guess what, we just came to terms with the fact that for some time now we've been cheating on our fans (and on ourselves) - we evolved something that was great into something sh**ty!" - I believe this is one of the greatest moves cartoon-show-creators have ever made. These 20 minutes are packed with metaphors and statements that are so unusual for South Park - already 5 minutes into the episode I knew something was wrong, odd, different... But in the end I smiled and was so thankful for this revelation.

Over the years I was seriously wondering where South Park was going - the topics got repetitive - the average episode quality dramatically sunk starting with season 8 - humor was largely based on aggressive American slapstick rather than the original black (british) sarcastic humor - it became almost entirely dependent on current issues in the world - the exaggerated topics left the makers no "air" to slow down again - it mostly revolved around conspiracy, stereotypes, trends or stupid celebrities - the "points to prove" became either increasingly absurd or too theatrical - the sequential dramaturgy of each episode became almost identical after season 10 - I could go on...

Until season 4 South Park is absolutely timeless, fresh, cheeky, honest and original. Until season 7 it became more sadistic, sociopolitical and versatile. Season 7 itself confirmed the routine that was starting to take action. Up from season 8 you can clearly observe certain "side topics" Matt & Trey may have experienced during their childhood - but the main concerns have already been used. So the only way to get the show going now was to weave the setting together with things happening at that time in the real world. So it became like a "Saturday Night Let's review the past 7 days in a comedic comment"-show that almost cried out to be forgotten when its successor aired. In fact I can hardly quote any statement made from now on... It kinda became sh**ty... Season 9 finally confirmed the new destination: mainstream!

Like Randy said - I've been unhappy for a long time - So have I been. I think this isn't about growing old within the heads of Matt & Trey, it's more about the self-pressure of topping themselves after each episode in a paradigm that they didn't want to have created in the first place. That's why this episode is so "asymmetrical" for a routine South Park one.

Damned, I should get to and end with this. In conclusion: I interpret this as a cry for help. They're stuck in something they obviously can't get out of anymore. Are they growing old? No, they are getting wise. Someone once said "You realized you've become mature after you stopped educating your parents (-> audience)" - perhaps the tranquilizing remedy for this.....is cynicism. I seriously can't wait what's going to be next, and even if it was the end of the whole show, I would be satisfied. Thanks Matt & Trey for this confession!

Full Frontal (1993–1997)

Chronicles of a generation

[8/10 · 12 May 2011]

To start off: Full Frontal is neither innovative, nor ultra-funny, nor super-sophisticated... in fact the show can be seen as a rip off of many formats that have preceded.

But there is one thing that makes it original: it's Australian - to the core!

Yes, you're reading right, I'm Austrian, not Australian, and I picked up this show when I visited this lovely country in the mid-1990'ies. I wasn't that impressed when I first saw it but I smelled a certain irony in the air which charmingly dropped from the grid of rather generic jokes. This irony mirrors the development of the country's national identity in many ways.

Reflecting current issues and making fun of it, add the Australian spirit to the whole thing - it became rather understandable to me how most Australians actually tick. And after some episodes I didn't just like it - I ended up loving it.

Full Frontal particularly shines with reoccurring topics such as Milo Kerrigan, David McGahan's World, The Netty Show, Fabio's Love Tips or stupid commercials (which most likely mock an ad recently on TV) which gave the characters depth and room for a little bit of unpredictability. At the same time it had a solid balance between outback-slapstick-humor and taking a charming poke at politics. Every show is basically the same: you, the viewer, are switching through TV channels for 42min - what you are about to see is obviously odd but somehow related to what people really encounter in their daily program - so the makers suggest that everything on TV is stupid.

This show was the cradle for many great careers of the participating actors, at he head Eric Bana and Shaun Micallef. It was definitely the chemistry between all these incredibly creative and versatile people that made this show so special. Full Frontal is with no doubt a chronicle of Australian humor history, not only because it was so extensive, it also never struggled or aspired to be a historical gemstone but by doing what they wanted that's what it became.

Definitely worth a peek!!!

The Green Hornet (2011)

why......

[5/10 · 2 May 2011]

......are even the "meant-to-be-cool"-movies nowadays so mediocre?

The fundament of this film is actually quite alright, nothing super-special, but alright. Let's not forget that the topic will soon be a century old - knowing that it throws in the option of giving it a different approach, maybe like the Batman series from the 1960's. Yeah, why not?

OK, here we get to the first problem. Trying to be super-cool, Hollywood chose to hand this project to a an uprising funny guy who also proved to have some brains in his previous work. Well, that's how this whole movies feels and it simply doesn't work like that. Seth Rogen manages to constantly create those uncomfortable moments with his presence and just doesn't feel right. As cool and pseudo-overestimated as he tries to portray the character of Britt Reid he fails to deliver a figure that you start liking during the ongoing of the film. There is hardly any character development whatsoever to me it feels like 120 Million Dollars have been given to the wrong team of people.

Of course Christoph Waltz is odd and cool, of course the effects are neat, of course some dialogs and situations are really funny, ...but all of that doesn't necessarily make a good movie! The Green Hornet tries ambitiously to reach this "cool audience" who have some braincells left - sadly it just can't keep up with action (satire) flicks that have worked way better with a way lower budget and cast.

Die Piefke-Saga (1990– )

interessante und witzige Gesellschaftsstudie zweier Nachbarländer

[9/10 · 27 April 2011]

Das Thema dieser Serie kann eigentlich in einem Satz zusammengefasst werden: Kritische Auseinandersetzung mit dem Verhältnis vom deutschen Urlauber im österreichischen Bergland Tirol.

Auch wenn sich das Thema vermutlich auf mehrere Nachbarländer die in einer Hassliebe stehen übertragen lässt, so taucht die "Piefke Saga" doch etwas spezifischer in das Verhältnis des Deutschen zum ländlichen Österreicher, welcher das Wort Piefke als Schimpfwort für einen stereotypen Deutschen verwendet.

Rund um dieses Wort baut sich auch das Gerüst dieser Geschichte auf. Als die deutsche Urlauberfamilie Sattmann eines Tages während ihres Traditionsurlaubs im Tiroler Lahnenberg (fiktiver Ort) in einer Zeitung per Schlagzeile wachgerüttelt werden, dass sie in ihrem Lieblingsurlaubsland eigentlich sehr unbeliebt sind und als Piefke beschumpfen werden entbrennt ein erbitterter Kampf zwischen zwei Kulturen die sich brauchen, gegenseitig ausnutzen, austricksen und dann doch wieder helfen, weil sie einander brauchen.

Die Familie Sattmann repräsentiert in dieser Konstellation die in den Augen der Tiroler typische deutsche Familie: starr, seelenlos, humorlos, überheblich, naiv - doch in Wahrheit sind diese lediglich auf der Suche nach einem Flecken Ruhe und Harmonie als Kompensation zu ihrem hektischen Leben in der Bundeshauptstadt.

DIe Tiroler werden als anfangs freundliche, traditionsbewusste, ehrliche und stets bemühte Gastgeber präsentiert. Jedoch wird bald klar, dass hinter diesen Masken genau kalkulierte Spiele getrieben werden um den "Mythos Tirol" am Leben zu halten.

Besonders der letzte Teil der Serie sorgte für eine Welle der Entrüstung von sowohl österreichischer als auch deutscher Seite und wurde bei Wiederholungen nicht selten einfach ausgelassen. Ich persönlich interpretiere den letzten Teil eher als witziges Sahnehäubchen einer grandiosen Trilogie (obwohl vierter Teil). Er stellt für mich mehr eine Zusammenfassung der Metabotschaften der ersten drei Teile dar und diese hab ich oben schon beschrieben.

Und nun zu den filmerischen Werten: Einen Oscar für die Ausstattung und restlichen Production Values würde es sicherlich nicht geben. Doch obwohl die Mittel für Produktion und cinematografische Ausführung offenbar recht knapp waren, ist die Geschichte äusserst überzeugend in Szene gesetzt. Die Charaktere weisen eine teilweise spürbare Tiefe auf und manche Dialoge surfen messerscharf über die Front der Kulturunterschiede der beiden Länder. Und so unwohl man sich in manchen Momenten beim zuschauen fühlt, so sehr muss man sich oft eingestehen, dass es doch recht nahe an der Realität liegt.

Wenn man die Bezeichnung "Britischer Galgenhumor" meets "Deutsche vs Österreichische Gesellschaftssatire" gelten lassen könnte würde es wahrscheinlich am besten dieses Werk beschreiben. Eine sehr sauber geschriebene Gegenüberstellung zweier verschiedener Charismen, die sowohl ihre Unterschiede wie auch ihre Gemeinsamkeiten über Umwege entdecken. Dem Charme der Piefke Sage kann man sich (wenn in Stimmung) wirklich schwer entziehen. Empfehlung!

Portal 2 (2011 Video Game)

for science...

[9/10 · 27 April 2011]

"You are now thinking in portals..." - this used to be the tag line for an underdog game-project which completed the Orange Box. While most of the people bought this product because of Half Life 2 - Episode 2 the main feature only had limited playtime. After exploring the game set of the the Orange Box players were stunned by "Portal", an ego-shooter with no shooting and parallels to the Half Life universe.

In fact it was only a matter of time until the huge testing facility of Aperture Science got revived for the next run - and story.

While Portal 1 was pretty much done within 3 hours its successor waits with 7-8 hours of fun. It appears a little short - that's where the co-op mode comes in, adding almost a new dimension to the game's paradigm. Solving puzzles, mazes and riddles with a partner not only opens up possibilities of creating problems to solve - it also enhances one's horizon of thinking. The co-op mode does not really develop a story, but just for the fact that after solving some puzzles ("tests") the player is left with an unique impression, this games deserves a huge credit.

The story picks up where its predecessor left off - but digs way deeper into the history and structures around Aperture Science. It's a delight to move through very different environments solving unique puzzles which are created with a particular love for details. After some rooms the player occasionally feels like a genius because the presentation of problems are extremely unusual. The voices you are accompanied by dramatically raise the level atmosphere as the voice actors do (typical for Valve) an exceptional job. The whole flow of the game grants a fluid game-play and hardly ever comes to halt.

To me personally the main point of praise is the fact that Valve manages to send you through approximately 8 hours of the same game-play without making it boring. The story is appealing, unique and weaves in seamlessly into the Half Life universe.

Two things that I thought were not quite state of the art: 1. The graphics engine is out of date, no doubt. For this game it isn't THAT important to have the latest graphics, still it's very apparent at some point and very untypical for Valve. 2. Many aspects are almost too familiar from part one. The showdown, the credits, some monologues and game-plays, etc...

BUT, some other aspects would receive more than just 10 points and that's why Portal 2 still deserves a solid score of 9 points.

Let's face it: Valve produces games which are far more than the average assembly-line-games pumped out every year. The love for detail, interaction, presentation of problems, dialogs, story and game-play clearly stands out in comparison to even major game developer studios. And Portal 2 continues this tradition seamlessly - yes, I may have expected "a little" more but in the end it's still another magnum opus which will be talked about for a long time. No doubt, this game is already one of 2011's highlights and even though other games have way better effects, graphics, models or realism - Valve draws a very clear line: While other studios produce games, they craft art!

Black Swan (2010)

Aronofsky is evolving ..... without losing his roots! Wow!

[8/10 · 27 February 2011]

Nina is an aspiring ballet dancer. All she strives for is the role of the swan in swan lake. Playing the white swan doesn't seem to be the problem, rather the black swan develops into an obstacle. After the director of her school tells her to be the next swan Nina falls into a twisted daydream battling yet welcoming her dark side.

The story is as simple as it is complex at the same time. But the joker of this film is definitely Aronofsky's typical pace-play, cut, camera and most of all: sound design! Especially the sound makes this film exceptional - while on one hand it is filled with beautiful classical music performed mostly minimally (piano) and on the other with dark distorted spheres, back-hair-raising-sound effects and very creative transitions to support the cut pace. Aronofsky quotes himself without forgetting to show development and exactly those "once missing elements" make this film very mature and yes, indeed a worthy Academy Award contestant.

In my opinion the film sometimes had scenes stretched a little too long while it could have celebrated others to a larger extent. Overall it was very impressive to see a film that can't really be compared to anything I have ever seen. Sure, the story is not the most original but in this case it's more about how it is told.

The triangle Portman-Cassel-Kunis works just perfectly - carrying this film with all its beauty and horror.

If you trace back the history of Darren Aronofsky's films this one definitely marks a milestone. It is the combination of elements he was experimenting with in the past - and now put together to a wonderful intermezzo! I'm impressed!

Hulk (2003)

Wonderful Piece of art - incredibly underrated

[8/10 · 23 February 2011]

In a time where superhero movies seem to come from the assembly line and standards are (sadly) set already it is hard to find gems that really transcend these paradigms.

Ang Lee made a different approach to the superhero genre - and the people didn't like it! Why? After Daredevil, Blade, Elektra, Aeon Flux, League of extraordinary gentlemen, Spiderman (yes, i mean it), Spawn, etc etc there are many parallels you can draw between superhero films. And Hulk is the only thing that the others aren't: un-American! In a very rare exception we have a film here that doesn't have the arrogance and straight-forward story that we seem to have gotten used to too easily.

Spiderman (in particular) follows the EXACT steps you can read in a tutorial for film making - that may be neat to watch but leaves no space for surprises or artistic inputs. Ang Lee seems to have taken especially this thought very seriously and created a piece of art that the average pop-corn-formula-film-liking movie-goer may find hard to digest. No doubt, this movie is not made for assembly-line-film-lovers - it is constructed very thoughtfully and goes beyond the interpretation of a superhero. It plays with the chaos that erupts out of the events rather than glorifying another world saviour.

There is no real good and evil, there only is an overcharge from both sides that don't know how to master the situation. The American movie-goer averagely wants black and white sides, a proud US-flag waving and a hero that saves the day (+nation and eventually the world, maybe even the universe). Nope, not in this one. While most of the other films establish superheroes as something that fits perfectly into our society, Hulk plays with the idea of what would happen if unknown uncontrolled untameable power surfaces - and that both sides act incredibly humane. At this point 80% of movie-consumers are out and 90% of movie-lovers come in (that number is small as we know).

I appreciated the rather unconventional storytelling, I admire the cast, I treasure the artistic hybrid of comic and reality and I enjoyed the portrayal of energy. Now, anyone who has seen Asian action films will find many parallels - the question is, are YOU ready to adapt to some of those standards when they are being poured over a western story? I was... And I was overwhelmed!

Anyone calling this movie the worst film they've ever seen (and there are quite few stating this) should stay with Spiderman, Transformers and Blade and get the same product over and over again (because they keep buying it). For my part I was grateful to see that there are people out there who get the chance to put a very distinctive stamp on their work making it unique and deep.

Five years later the audience won and an assembly line version was released, not as bad as some others but definitely not as creative and visionary as this one. Great job Ang!!!!!

Tomorrow, When the War Began (2010)

OK, kids, listen up:

[5/10 · 14 February 2011]

Here's a guide how to possibly survive when another nation invades your country and you're left behind enemy lines:

• NEVER stand on/at open areas, peaks, windows, roofs, etc - you might get spotted VERY easily.

• Team up with survivors and make sure a hierarchy is defined

• Don't draw any attention to you like screaming, unnecessary waiting (on open spots), using loud items (like dump trucks eg) or making a lot of light

• Try to look for food and a safe place to lay low for a while

• Don't start pondering about the fate of ANYONE who got caught - right NOW it's all about survival!

• Don't assume blowing something up will keep away enemy soldiers away - in fact it will do the opposite! - When you see an enemy base (or agglomeration of enemy troops) -> STAY AWAY FROM IT!!!! - Don't attack - RETREAT!

AND PLEASE DON'T MAKE A MOVIE IGNORING EACH POINT FROM ABOVE!

Now to the review:

I assume this is a teen movie, made by teens for teens. Only with this mindset I can make a solid review on this one (otherwise it couldn't be taken serious). I acknowledge the motivation that the writers, makers and actors put into this film and to me these first steps are promising BUT in the end it's only a very predictable teen flick lacking any logic.

To the good parts: Yes, the scenery is amazing. Camera, colors, music and cut is up to date and works within its microcosm. The action is credible and is well distributed among the segments.

And now to the rest and the reality: I fell into several sleepy phases while sitting in the theater. Not only once my shaking head fell into my hands wondering "damn you guys are stupid" - dramatic effects? Everyone's beautiful, agile and motivated - but extremely unintelligent and illogical. Usually you see kids behaving like this in US-slasher-films where one by one gets killed (and you're fine with it because they're acting stupid anyways) - but in this one the kids act stupid AND survive.

It's also very apparent that this movie gets all the positive reviews from mainly Australians. I love this patriotism but regarding the fact that Australia has brought us some world class films that really moved international film this one is just lame, sorry. And I just read that there will be part 2 and 3. Please not, pleeeaaaase!!!!

The conclusion of this film could have rescued a lot but instead the writers chose to make it pseudo-wise, pathetic and teen-hormone driven. When it was over I was left in the theater giving other attendants questioning looks which were painfully returned. I wouldn't even recommend this film for kids and teens because maybe they would even think that this the real deal. Disappointing, sorry!

The IT Crowd: Italian for Beginners (2010) Season 4, Episode 4

The IT Crowd is back in the game!

[9/10 · 16 July 2010]

There are very few shows out there that really appear to have a master-plan. I was frankly a little confused by the first three episodes of season 4 but this one finally drops the bomb every fan was waiting for.

In short, "Italian for Beginners" is an instant IT Crowd classic. After diving a little more into the characters themselves in the previous episodes, this one portrays these new aspects in action. Fast paced, splendid punchlines, cynical metaphors and allegories and even nostalgic IT Crowd feeling at some points.

After episode 1 I chuckled, after episode 2 I had some laughs, episode 3 confused me.... on episode 4 (this one) I almost p****d my pants! The season is definitely reaching its first climax. Congratulations to the writers and actors!

A little "half spoiler" at the end I just need to get rid off: Remember these classic but slightly boring moments in comedy when the protagonist gets exposed in public slowwwwwly and the process becomes the embarrassing joke? Well, these are those moments when your head (that's already shaking) falls into your palms and you go "noooooo.... how humiliating" - Towards the end of "Italian for Beginners" the show reverses that kind of humor and you actually begin your initial head-into-your-hands-fall sequence but once the scene is finished you got your head up and ask yourself "How did she just pull THAT off?" and just start laughing!

Hope you enjoy it as much as I did!

Kicking It (2008)

As "pure" as it can get...

[8/10 · 4 May 2010]

The present of sports: money, sponsoring, fame, corruption, scandals, doping, ..... sometimes it seems we have forgotten what "the game" is all about and what it should mean to those playing it. (not just soccer, a game in general). People are so obsessed with stardom, statistics, money and the fame that comes with it that they totally forget why they started playing it in the first place.

Frankly I rediscovered the game when I saw this film! What did I see? Certainly no money, no stars, no fame and no overpriced fan merchandising......but 100% sportsmanship!!!! These people come from the streets, they know nothing about the world, nothing about the joys of life and nothing about a stable life! All of this changes during one tournament. And you as a viewer can witness it! It is very hard to describe the emotion that goes through one's heart when you see people who have nothing growing together and become a team. The players that this film accompanies are very diverse, they all have different goals or develop their goals during their journey to South Africa. But most of all you can see how their horizons expand while they play and meet new people.

This is sports at its core, this is what the game was invented for: to bring people together, to forge a team and succeed in becoming a contributing member in something bigger! While watching it I felt very touched - but not because of sadness but rather because of the true joy that these people express when they master their obstacles.

The film itself doesn't really stand out in any production values (like editing, expensive shots, music, post production, etc) - but what for? The content of the pictures is way beyond anything that high budget productions usually capture. Films like this one are released every few years, a rare gem!!!! If you want to be reminded of what it means to just "play" (and while you do even become a better person) - go and watch this film! I was more than just moved - I was overwhelmed!

W. (I) (2008)

Rewriting history - making it more boring than it already is...

[5/10 · 27 January 2009]

I saw this movie the other night on TV (it was broadcasted on national television because of the end of George W Bush's presidency)

Frankly, I have never been a big fan of the person, politics and appearance of George W Bush and I actually didn't quite know what to expect. News? Validation? Shock? Truth?

Well, if at least ONE thing of the points mentioned above would have come true I would have been happy, unfortunately this movie confesses its hollowness right from the beginning. The biggest problem I had with it was that it never tried to "put the pieces together". Instead you are being left with bits and pieces of truth put together to a movie. If THIS was George W Bush's life, it was amazingly boring. And we know it wasn't. Oliver Stone should have known that the character W could only get as far and endure because of others: His father, Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, the neo-conservatives... They all do appear in the movie (and the cast is truly brilliant, let's be honest) but basically they are supernumeraries and contribute nothing essential to this story (except for his father) which is simply historically wrong. By trying to portray a neutral picture Oliver Stone (probably) got lost by the idea NOT to polarize. Unfortunately he chose a VERY fragile topic to do so. Trying to show a not very intelligent pompous dolt-marionette as a big global player just doesn't work, probably not even with a six-year-old kid.

Surprisingly after you have seen this movie you will ask: - Now WHO is this guy? (that I have been watching for over a 100min now) - WHY is this guy the way he is? - HOW did he get through with most of things he did?

These questions would actually forge the base of a biography but none of them are answered here. This film expects the viewer to KNOW the person whose story is being told. So what is this movie? I believe it's Oliver Stone's subtle and careful interpretation of a person that is simply not worth being portrayed. After all you are being left with nothing, so i honestly don't recommend this film at all. For a history lesson i recommend other sources. Watch FOX for the pro bush version, watch the rest of the global media for the other side, I recently saw "Being W" on the French/German channel ARTE and this actually entertained as well as it educated me.

Oliver Stone, I'm not sure where you want to go with this. But by being so careful (and non-polarizing) about it you ended up going nowhere. What's left is a hollow frame in which you could portray everybody's (average Joe's) life somehow entertainable. To apply this formula to a president of the United States of America is not very honorable... Or is exactly THIS your statement regarding the side you stand on?

Das iTeam - Die Jungs an der Maus (2008– )

Good example for "doesn't work"!

[3/10 · 22 January 2009]

Lately it seems to be pretty fashionable to not just copy ideas of shows but even to copy entire episodes.

Here we have the latest copy of a brilliant British comedy: The IT Crowd. Sometimes I wonder: Don't producers watch TV on their own (at least sometimes)? Because if they did they would know what kind of humor their country shares, you don't have to be an anthropologist to know that. And we know that Somalis laugh about different stuff than Indonesians. On the other hand Brazilians don't necessarily find the same thing funny like the Irish do. OK, where do I want to go here? Simple, British humor doesn't work in German, or at least not as effectively. Alright, so far it seems at least logical to dare the experiment. But why translate every sentence almost to its very grammatical core? Sometimes it doesn't even sound German anymore, needless to say that instead of laughing you sit in front of your TV being confused saying "Wwwwwwwwwhat?".

We have seen too many non quality copies of international shows into German (The Office, CSI, etc) but this is proving once more that you should better stick to the Original.

Nice try though... (and sad for Sky DuMont who is a good actor)

Let's Make Money (2008)

let's kill time...

[6/10 · 14 November 2008]

It isn't a good idea to send ahead that i fell asleep twice while being at the movies watching this film.

The good things first: Yes, this movie explains the unfairness of modern international trading policies. It shows up the direct contrast between rich and poor countries and how this condition is perceived from both sides. Those who make money almost seem to apologize for their actions but on the other hand don't really feel guilty because "that's the way it is".

In a very simple and direct way the foundations of the current financial crisis are explained, and even I "kinda" understood how this disaster was made possible now. Yes, it is very frustrating and it just shows how irresponsibly our money is being treated by the banks or whoever else we negotiate about our money with.

Unfortunately there is something wrong with the flow of this movie. I don't understand a lot of segments, particularly the "impression scenes". This seems to have become typical for Austrian documentary filmers - to just let the camera roll, catch whatever just happens (which is mostly nothing) and edit it together as an "eternal misery scene". Whereas in documentaries of the last years the statements are edited together so obviously to save time, "Let's make money" takes its time to let people talk, and THIS can be nerve wrecking. Some interviewees are very old and therefore talk VERY slow, so it might take some time until the full sentence is over and when it's said it's very likely that you forgot how it began.

As much as I treasure the content of the film I must admit that I found it extraordinarily boring and hard to watch. I don't know why directors or editors want to test their audience by presenting a film that appears "half done".

But I am sure that this one will earn tons of prizes for the very hot topic and the "unconventional film-making". I for myself have seen way more accessible documentaries that are more informative and don't appear like they would try to be a piece of art.

Conclusion: Great topic/content, very poor presentation!

South Park: Tonsil Trouble (2008) Season 12, Episode 1

South Park is over...

[4/10 · 18 March 2008]

Incredible, when this show started in 1997 I couldn't wait for each episode to air! I loved the humor, the accurate metaphors, the intelligent social critics, the character interaction/development... Everything was pure, fresh, progressive and very entertaining! Let's fast forward to 2008 and the beginning of Season 12:

To be honest, I don't know what to say, really! Over the last two seasons I thought "Come on, be patient, it's a transition period, it'll get better". Instead, it got more mindless, more brutal, less funny, less intelligent, more recycled (from old topics) and most of all -> more pointless. But this episode tops it all. It's not just pointless, it's kind of nothing... at all! This episode flew by, at some points it felt VERY hard to even pay attention. Although South Park is a show that usually requires a lot of attention this episode had no content whatsoever . Not even the "problem" is cool. Aids is a fragile topic and Magic Johnson is certainly not the answer and money definitely not the cure!

I don't know what they were thinking. I'm getting more and more disgusted by South Park than entertained/inspired. I suppose this was the last episode that i let direct my evening schedule. (Or maybe I'm getting old...)

(T)Raumschiff Surprise - Periode 1 (2004)

Wrong title... Wrong time for these kind of jokes...

[4/10 · 30 October 2007]

To start off, the film's producer Michael Herbig asked Germany to vote on his next film after "Der Schuh des Manitu" and the people chose (T)Raumschiff Surprise to be its topic.

Five minutes after film start you know whether you are going to like it or not. Frankly, I'm slightly getting sick of this "you-must-laugh"-humour that has still not reached its climax in Germany. In his first big feature movie "Der Schuh des Manitu" the cool charm was underlined by a "super-gay"-Indian (sorry, Native American) but in this flick we got an all gay spaceship (which only appears VERY rarely). It's not the fact that they are gay which bothers me, it's rather the fact that as the audience you are left with no choice than either laugh about it or leave the theater. I chose to give it a chance but I was more and more disappointed, particularly after about 20min when everything that the title stands for gets totally lost. The movie appears like it doesn't know where it's going and the more it tries to get further, the more it gets stuck with cheap jokes which have no class at all.

To be honest, I hate writing this because I had such big expectations of this movie that it annoys me how disappointed I was. The special FX shots are really cool, the music is state of the art, make up is nice, story got probably written on the dunny and the actors try their best (they really do)... Unfortunately that just doesn't make a good movie! And there has been another Spaceballs already, for humanity's sake! If you keep that in mind while watching "(T)Raumschiff Surprise" it's only devastating... And i seriously wouldn't be surprised if gay people rampage on this one! What a pity!

Transformers (2007)

so sad...

[4/10 · 24 September 2007]

As a kid I was totally hooked on those mystery robots that can transform and fight their epic war. I owned at least 20 Transformers, always watched the animated series and just couldn't wait to see them on a "real" screen.

The more I hoped, the more I got disappointed. In fact, my friend had to keep me on the seat during movie because several times I was about to get up and leave the theater. Why? In fact very simple...

Maybe I was looking for that old Transformer feeling I had when I was a kid. Well, it didn't come back at ANY point of the movie. Instead I got sprinkled with a film without any logic, intelligence nor uniqueness. People told me that this is the next barrier of film, no, it isn't. It shows very well how you can damage a great story with a redirection of the cash flow of the makers. Here ALL the money flowed into special FX, full stop. The cast is exceptionally dull, shallow and underdeveloped. The script is so cheesy that a 10 year old could have written it (maybe that's the target audience but how is a ten year old supposed to get nostalgic on this one?).

Some excerpts of what I found "head shakingly" stupid:

• Robots that talk in Ghetto slang

• A secret service that is so secret, not even the state knows about it

• Soldiers that shoot shoot shoot and just don't seem to notice that their actions have no effect

• The whole arsenal of the US military is "shown off"!

• Robots trying to "hide" from the target's parents and behaving like amateurs.

• The "character" of the little evil spybot is just too similar to the spiders in "Eight Legged Freaks", making noises like a baby.

• The people behave like in Jerry Zucker movies: stupid, illogical, immature, ...

• If you have seen Bad Boys 2 or The Island you will notice extremely strong similarities considering the action. Actually it's just a repeat.

• Why do you always have a clear look at Megan's tanned breasts?

When the movie was finished I was close to crying. I felt like I was robbed of any feeling or nostalgia that I had about the "Transformers". I decided to erase this movie out of my memory though it has done a lot of damage already. I gave it five points because it looks expensive, of course the action is well filmed (although edited a little too fast at some points), the robots move really convincing and the impacts they have on the environments also appear very real. Still, it just doesn't help the film to be enjoyable... Hollywood, what have you become?