Change Your Image
jornevdk
Reviews
Ironclad (2011)
The everlasting clean-shaved chin
Watching the trailer of "Ironclad" made me curious. I'm a big fan of swords play and medieval stuff, so this one should be right up my alley. There was however one thing I didn't like from the start: it revolves around a Templar. But let me first start off with the good parts.
The action scenes are nicely done. It is bloody, messy and brutal, but it is never to much. They are shot in such a way that it looks very authentic and really adds to the entire atmosphere of the movie. The blood never flows massively ("300" fans will be disappointed) and the wounds never stay on screen for more then a flash. It's just enough to show that gore definitely is a part of all it, but that it doesn't revolve only that. I found myself comparing it with combat scenes from movies as "Blackhawk down", but then set in medieval England. The makers probably wanted to get as close as reality was back then instead of another fantasy sword clash, and they did that quite nicely.
Steady cast, which resolves in good acting. Paul Giamatti's personification of "Sir John" stands out by far however. He's a lunatic! In a positive way. James Purefoy does a decent job delivering the main character, but it's nothing special to write to home about.
Being a medieval-swordplay-LARP-kinda guy, I find the clothing in a "sword movie" to be very important. No problem here. "Ironclad" does a hell of a lot better then fellow templar movie "Season of the witch" in which the clothing was simply awful. Another plus.
So you would say I have been enjoying this one. A bit I guess. But something kept nagging me.
**Note: this parts more personal*
My biggest problem, as said before, is that we again have a Templar as a good guy. Why? Why are Templars always on the good side? We all now of the horrible stuff they did, it's even mentioned in the movies because it is always "such a burden to them". Can someone please take a different history class then all the other film makers, and write about a clash between templars slaughtering to some land, trying to christianize it and the native's fighting for their lives? And why are Danish/Scandinavian warriors always portrayed as barbaric warriors who flee at the first sight of a possibility of loss? It's hurtful really, it's a cliché that has been done over and over. And I still don't understand why "the Danish leader" at "some point" didn't rip off "his employers" head. But then again, this is a personal thing.
On to the negative things that count more as facts of some sorts:
Although the fighting overall has a realistic feel, there definitely are flaws. Biggest one is that a practically unexperienced squire is able to stand up against veteran fighters after swinging at a wooden pole and one speech. Sorry, not buying it.
I now fully understand why Napoleon failed to conquer England! Every guy there is like superman, killing 50 men before even getting a scratch! People please, portraying someone as a good fighter is one thing, but do NOT overdo it. I would like to go in to details but then I would have to spoil stuff, which I will not.
I.m.o Marshall turns to herioc at a certain point. He's looking like a sword swinging Rambo as the story furthers.
And YES, Of course, in a time where man and women are equal, the movie makers have to put in a fighting lady, that has NEVER held a sword before, in the midst of the melee. I've seen enough of these lady's. Either make them badass, full blown warriors (like Olga Kurylenko's "Etain" in "Centurion") and let them be played by a woman who can actually deliver such a character, or leave them a princess and stay of the battlefield. Kate Mara is the second, tries to be the first, and fails.
Story is decent. I personally would like to know more about the connection between the men that follow the "Baron Albany" without doubt. I think the makers used most of the story so they could make a medieval battle movie.
Last but not least, I GOT to know what kind of miracle lotion or salve the squire uses to keep his everlasting, shiny, clean-shaved chin in a time span of over almost half a year in which the movie takes place.
Well, that's the load of it, to sum it up:
Very good battle scenes. Decent to good acting, Kate Mara being the low side, Paul Giamatti being way awesome. Not an overdue of blood and gore, just enough to keep it realistic and authentic Overpowered Templars and English on one side. Cliché barbaric Danish/Scandinavian warriors on the other. Authentic and realistic vibe of it all. Beautiful worked out clothing and battles really aid in this.
The Chaperone (2011)
Enjoyable, but a bit of a "tweener"
Just finished watching this one. I must say, it's much more enjoyable then I first thought. But then again, I wasn't expecting it to be completely bad either.
It's a nice movie to put away a small 2 hours time. Acting is stable, not impressive but it isn't bad either. I did however find myself to be continuously annoyed by Ariel Winter and her character. She has this "Something smells awful"-kinda look on her face and in the tone of her voice the entire movie. But then again, I'm not fond of small girls in big roles overall, so I guess it's more of a personal thing. I like the whole "modern spoiled children" thing that's going on. It gives a modern, almost recognizable vibe.
And dare I say Paul Levesque is really capable of some acting? I believe this is his first main character role in a movie, and he did what he had to. Be an impressive, intimidating man (being a pro-wrestler comes in handy here) at first, and on the other side a caring father a second later. His acting is, in my opinion, better then what I've seen from fellow WWE-ers Stone Cold, Kane (got to give him credit for being a scary S.O.A.* without any monster suit and special effects though), John Cena and Dwayne Johnson (although I haven't watched Fast Five yet).
And there in lies the negative part of this movie. I think it deserves a better score then the 4.5 it's getting right now. But this is a WWE Studios production. Not necessarily a bad thing from my point of view, but it's almost as if people click in there score for this movie the moment that WWE logo pops up. "WWE Movie, can't be that good" and thats it. And because of that, other people hesitate to watch. Lately however, I'm noticing a rise in quality in their movies, be it a small one. I think if they keep up the pace (small steps at the time) we one day might witness something really nice coming from their corner (Sorry, just couldn't let that one pass).
Last thing I want to mention is the "Tweener" part i revere at in the summary. "The Chaperone" has the same little snag that the "Narnia" movies have. It's a bit to adult for children, but it's to childish for adults. For example, we get full contact fighting and guns and stuff, but no blood is spilled. And that applies to the storyline as well. They combined two very basic plots together, and it came out somewhat unstable, not fully delivering either plot at it's best.
To sum it up; Enjoyable, a bit to long stretched movie that puts your brain in relaxation mode. Take in the last fact I mentioned, and you should do just fine sitting this one out.
Thor (2011)
Marvel has surpassed them selves
I just got back form seeing "Thor" in my local cinema. First off, big negative to them for ruining the after credits by just stopping it after 10 seconds. So yes, we again have scene after the credits, and yes, I can confirm it's epic (after googeling it), and no, I am (of course) not going to tell you what it is.
One small side note for those who read this, I am a huge Marvel fan-boy. I'll try to conceal that and try to be a bit objective. That is even harder for me considering I am of Frisian lineage, meaning, well, lets just say I have a Mjölnir tattoo and tend to hail to Odin and Thor while raising my drinking horn.
Onward to the movie!
I expected a fun movie. It's Marvel after all. Lots of special effects, good, decent acting, not to deep of a story. Did I come unprepared. It simply blew me away. Marvel picked up the pace after "Iron Man". I liked that one a lot. Then came the new "Hulk" which, in my opinion, was also time well spent watching it. "X-men: Origins Wolverine" was awesome, be it a bit simple. "Iron Man 2" topped all 3 of them. But until now, the "X-men" movies have always been my favorite. As said, until now.
"Thor" is everything you would expect from a Marvel movie, and so, so much more. The visuals are stunning. They are by far the best I personally have ever seen in a Marvel movie. They can compete for the first prise with "Avatar", and probably win that contest. Everything about it breaths "epic". This also goes for the music. Sound and visual blend in perfectly to create an overwhelming experience.
But acting is important as well. And it's spot on. It is here that my knowledge of the Northern mythology and stories kicks in. I caught myself comparing the facts I knew with that in the movie. I went in, thinking there might be some references to the Edda, but it was as if Marvel actually took the time to read the book! Yes there are some minor flaws, but nothing that really bothered me (like in other movies, big example being "Clash of the Titans", fun action, but just threw entire Greek mythology aside). Odin is spot on. Anthony Hopkins did it 100% perfect. Thor is as he should be; a good hearted, arrogant, slightly dumb, but enjoyable character who loves to drink, fight, drink and fight some more. His one-liners are really worth repeating when drinking with friends(I already warned my mother that she should start buying new coffee cups). The, for me, relatively new actor Chris Hemsworth just made it in to my "I want to see more of him"-list. Same goes for Loki. He might not have noticed it, but I think the Trickster took over a part of Hiddleston's body during the shooting of this movie. And last but definitely not least, a special notice for Idris Elba. Heimdall is simply awesome. Only a view lines for him, but he makes them count, for two! It's to bad that the other actors fade away in the background next to the 3 leading actors. Their performance is solid, they do what they have to do, but nothing more. This is also caused by the fact that their characters only reach a moderate amount of debt.
That is about the only remark I have on the movie. The debt of the supporting role's. The effects are breath taking and the references to the North religion is kept spared, even honored from my personal point of view. The action and special effect that come with them are, as said, epic. You all know the feeling when you watch a terrific movie scene, or listen to an awesome song. The goose bumps, the water in your eyes, the smile on your face. I've had it a view times during different movies, I always get it when listening to a new "Amon Amarth" CD or track, but I never experienced it multiple times as I did during this movie. I ask you to stay a while and watch the beautifully animated "Yggdrasil" during the end credits. I thought it was breath taking.
-Marvel fan boy (like me)? MUST SEE! -Viking/Norse saga/mythology fan/believer (like me)? Set aside the fact that it is Marvel, and you'll see an homage to our Gods yet unseen.
I'm rating it with 8 stars, because 9 and 10 is the region where, i.m.o, the movies with the deep stories and characters belong. That's the only reason. I think it is the best Marvel movie existing at this moment, and if they keep it up at this level, I can't wait to see what the future movies ("First Class", "Capt America", "The Avengers") have in store for us.
Splice (2009)
Catching, but too long and yet hasty
My first IMDb review, I don't know why I decided to write after watching Splice, just felt like it. Oh well, here goes.
Back here this movie was summarized as sort of science horror movie. So I got in expecting much more slash and dice and stuff. Plus there for Splice, if you want to see a scientific blood fest, you're at the wrong place for this one.
I watched this movie together with a friend of mine who studies bio-medical. He recognized a lot of the stuff and terms used in the beginning of the movie, he told me it was very accurate with what you could find in real life now these days, which actually surprised me and even shocked me a bit. It seems "Splice" is more realistic then I thought at first.
The subject it self is very catching i.m.o. I don't want to spoil anything here, but especially in the beginning, the movie succeeds in dragging you in and keeping your attention, constantly have you wondering what will happen next. But eventually it kind of hits a bump somewhere, and I caught myself looking at how long the movie was going to take, wondering if anything would happen anytime soon. But just when I was getting a bit bored, there was a new twist and it got my attention again.
Best part of it is that the makers succeed in creating something that gets you emotional attached. But here is also a snag. You really feel something for the main characters, but the movie constantly places them in a new context and suddenly changing their behavior and role. This happens more and more towards the end, kind of creating an emotional roller coaster, leaving you doubting what you should think or feel when the movie ends.
And there's the big negative on this one. The makers build op quite a story, believable characters, but after 3/4th of the movie, decide that it should end, and start rushing stuff (maybe they were running out of tape?). I hope I'm not SPOILING anything here but I don't really know how else to put this (which explains me tagging the "Contains spoiler" option). Near the end, it changes from a decent, believable, scientific drama to a more casual horror type of movie. And it kind of fails at that. It even becomes predictable. The last, say 20 minutes, manage to almost ruin the rest of the movie. This goes for the storyline, but for the creature as well.
The creature is very nicely done. The evolution is spot on, and it messes with you, since it looks so real and familiar, yet so strange. Almost like a spider; we all know what it is, yet the image doesn't really fit inside our head. But as said, the end also manages to ruin this part. It made me feel sad which way it evolved. It went from something special and unique to something we have seen so often. A shame really, and not deserving for something so nicely thought off and worked out during the rest of the film.
Decent is the word you're looking for when it comes to this movie. It even has some very good scenes that will stick for a while. The acting is, again, decent. At points very believable and really dragging you in, but sometimes the characters suddenly act in the complete opposite direction as what you expect, almost as opposite as black and white. Side note for the music; splendid! Not to complicated, but especially the piano parts manages to really ad up to the specific scenes. But it's the ending that brings down the score for this one, which is a shame for the rest of it.