Change Your Image
KirstenVerdel
Reviews
The Professor (2018)
No emotional implications at all
What a waste of time this was. And I'm saying that about a movie that basically tries to tell you not to waste any time. There is no emotional development or involvement from or with the characters. At all. The main character is dying, but at no time in the movie you feel, truly feel for him. Cardboard characters. Cliches. Poor acting. Don't go.
Star Trek Into Darkness (2013)
JJ Abrams killed Star Trek
JJ Abrams killed Star Trek. There, I said it. This wasn't a Star Trek movie, this was a Star Wars movie. JJ Abrams, who is also making the next Star Wars movie, apparently had the plots for the two movies mixed up. Whereas Star Trek is about human development, about humanity, exploring, complicated issues that are mainly resolved by thinking and arguing, Star Wars has always just been some shootouts in space. Don't get me wrong: I like action movies every now and then, especially in a Sci-Fi setting. I watch Star Wars as well.
But like I said: this is not supposed to be Star Wars. This is Star Trek. After the first 'new' Trek movie I wanted to give the creators the benefit of the doubt, but I was wrong. I could have known: the setup in the previous movie was like in every superhero movie these days: introduction of characters, background stories, introduction of some bad guy, a few fights, person/country/planet/universe saved. Second movie: worse bad guy(s), bigger fights, more explosions, BIGGER EXPLOSIONS, something saved again.
This was a formula movie. Another one. Movie theaters are flooded with them. The Hangover III, Fast and Furious V, Iron Man III, Scary Movie V, and that's just what's playing in theaters here in Holland *right now*.
Please please... somebody save Star Trek. Gene Roddenberry would have HATED this movie. It's everything Star Trek is nót about.
Boy do I miss Picard and Sisko.
Skyfall (2012)
The angel is in the details..
This is the first time in years that I review a movie on IMDb. The only reason why is that in all the reviews I have seen no/little attention has been paid to the things I noticed in Skyfall apart from the spectacular action scenes etc. When I first saw Daniel Craig as Bond I wasn't sure whether I liked him or not. I now know that I believe he's the best Bond, after Sean Connery. I like this Bond so much because he's rough around the edges. He's 'more human, but never humane', as I read somewhere.
I loved Skyfall. I loved how this movie shows that MI6 is still relevant in the 21st Century. I loved how both Bond and M kept up appearances (being tough) until the very, very end, where finally both M and Bond broke just a little bit. I loved how the movie suggested that Ms. Moneypenny and Bond made love, but it was never shown! Same as in the old movies: always temptation, but never... I loved how the Bond girl got killed because Bond couldn't aim properly (at the same time I was flabbergasted by how he didn't seem to care at all. How the movie didn't seem to care that he hadn't been able to save her, even though he had basically promised to). I loved how 'the old ways' (the Aston Martin, the radio, the eject button) proved relevant in our high-tech era. I loved the comment Bond made after The Bad Guy came on to him. I loved Adele's song. I loved the lights, the feeling that the scene in Shanghai gave me during the fight with the sniper. I loved how subtle the Heineken commercial ended up being (did anyone notice the 843845 Vaio laptops in the movie, I wonder how much théy paid!) and I especially loved how they did put the Martini tradition in the movie after all (the girl in Macau who is shaking a drink for Bond... shaking, not stirring... without the words ever being mentioned). Like the title of my post: the angel, not the devil, is in the details of this movie. This movie was such an incredible gift. It was a true celebration of 50 years Bond, with elements from past, present and glimpses into the future.
Apart from that, the plot is great, the scenery breathtaking, the action scenes are as Bond as it gets, Judi Dench's performance is.. just Judi. I loved this movie so much more than I expected. 007 is so very much alive. To my own surprise, I just realized I want to watch it again. For someone like me, who watches 100-150 a year in cinema, that's rather rare. ;)
Out of Africa (2000)
Breathtaking account of one of the most violent wars in Africa
Having just come back from Sierra Leone a couple of weeks ago, 5 years after the brutal war ended, it was breathtaking to see this documentary. Not breathtaking because it was so beautiful, but because it was so brutal. I didn't even know there was live footage from the war in Salone. Now I do.
I saw many children last month in the West-African country when I was there, with their hands of legs chopped off. I couldn't imagine how this happened. Now I do.
This documentary shows all the brutal details of a senseless war that tore apart one of the most beautiful countries in the world: Sierra Leone. From 1991 until 2002 200.000 people were brutally slaughtered by either the rebels, the ECOMOG force from Nigeria that was supposed to be keeping the peace and the Civil Defense Force that was supposed to defend the civilians. 50.000 people were amputated. Many people were shot without trial, even without any real cause other than some vague suspicions. Some of these shootings you see in this documentary. It's raw, it's brutal, it's unforgettable and it made me cry.
06/05 (2004)
Do trust the voting!
I can not agree with the last comment. I gave this movie a 1, simply because I think that as a movie it was completely nothing. The acting is lousy, but even worse: the plot is so ridiculous that I could hardly set myself to actually keep watching the movie. And not only was it ridiculous, it was extremely boring as well. The only interesting things in the movie were the music in the beginning and the few pieces of news broadcasts and the 'famous' Marcel van Dam piece from 'Het Lagerhuis'. But if Van Gogh would have cut & paste those pieces right behind each other (about 5 minutes I guess, at max?) it still would have been more interesting then the entire movie altogether. Kind of a bad result I'd say... the fact that keeping only 5 minutes of the movie intact would make it almost a better movie than it is now with over 1,5 hours. I really, really didn't like it at all. That's why I gave it a 1.
This movie doesn't even come close to JFK. That wasn't only an interesting story (like this could have been), it was a good movie as well. And eventually that's what counts: it's brought as a movie, but it sure doesn't act as a good one...
Lost in Translation (2003)
The most recognizable movie in the past 5 years
Another movie has entered my favorite top 5 ever... LIT is one great sensation from start until finish. I felt like as if I was in the movie myself. The atmosphere, the settings, the conversations, the humor, everything was so perfect, so subtle... Bill Murray was simply amazing!
The story itself was so recognizable, even for people who haven't been in such a situation. Many people noted it's about being alone, but I see it more as a movie about the best kind of friendship there is. The one that doesn't need words. The one in which you can't be lost in translation, simply because there is nothing that needs translation at all...
And the end of the movie was probably the best one I've ever seen...
If there is something like a must see movie, this one is it!