IgiS Reviews

The Expendables 2 (2012)

WARNING! This is not really a movie!!!

[5/10 · 28 August 2012]

As well as the first one, this is walking, shooting, crackling jokes tribute to those guys instead of the real action flick(if we can generally call action flick "real"). This is my biggest problem with this franchise. We always wanted to see those guys together, no question about it, but here they are not playing any characters at all. Arnold is no Trench. Who is Trench? Who is Church? Those are Arnold in Hawaiian t shirt and Bruce. And what they did to Dolph Lundgren in this movie for crying out loud? He acts like a character from bugs bunny cartoon in this film.

Even Sly's and Statham's parts aren't shaped in any distinctive way, they just have more lines to deliver.

As for people like Crews, Couture and Li, they are barely in the picture at all. And lets not even mention Norris.

I remember when I saw Li in Lethal Weapon 4 in cinema back in 98'. Now THAT was fun movie, and great villain by the way.

I don't mind a movie to be simple plot-wise, Rocky 4 was also simple plot-wise, but Stallone PLAYED Rocky, and Lundgren PLAYED Drago, those were specific characters, and not Sly with mustache and Dolph acting like a crazy version of himself(with endless reference to him really having Masters Degree in chemical engineering).

Only Van Damme is playing some coherent part here, and we don't just feel that Van Damme is in the movie as Van Damme rather we see a new bad guy, and that is good. But even here, again, script is so poor in terms of any character development that we really don't know him very much also. Van Damme himself presented his part in many interviews as a guy who is crazy, will not be stopped by anyone etc etc. but we don't feel/see it in a movie, his part is simply too short. Yet he was the best thing in this.

What I liked is this nostalgia factor about those older famous guys, but this feeling took over whole flick, and that's why it wasn't really exciting.

Too bad, I really like those guys.

Thor (2011)

One of Marvel's best adaptations, pure fun at the movies

[7/10 · 30 April 2011]

I highly recommend "Thor" to anyone willing to go on this type of escapist journey, which was prepared clearly as a fun inducing devise. It has all of those elements of good Marvel film. It is colorful, full of great CGI(3D really gets it job done well this time), deprived of unnecessary weight on plot(it is rather simple, yet not stupid), and it doesn't overstay its welcome, running just below 2hrs mark(but stay for an extra scene after the credits). Also it features very good performances all around. I was really impressed by newcomer Chris Hemsworth, who played lead role. It was spot on choice to go with him, instead of some more famous face, since he's done his job almost impeccably in a clearly star making role. Other players were very solid also, with beautiful Natalie Portman as main female character, Sir Hopkins in surprisingly long supporting role, and other fine actors(like Ray Stevenson, who was so disguised I only recognized him after the movie). I must say that it is best movie of it's kind since first Iron Man, and definitely in top group of comic book adaptations. Great way to start off summer time in cinemas, and let's just hope that what will follow this season(Transformers 3, Green Lantern, Captain America etc.), will be at least around that good.

Drive Angry (2011)

Ghost Rider meets The Wicker Man

[4/10 · 25 February 2011]

I wasn't expecting too much from "Drive Angry 3D" so I guess I cannot say I felt disappointed after the movie. With all it's high speed bravura, use of three dimensional technology, and overall edgy, gritty feel, it really is quite typical Nick Cage movie after all. It is clearly obvious that from pretty long time, what Cage is doing, is cashing in, and one of his roles that I can say stands out from his recent work was his take on Bad Lieutenant. What really brought me to DA was it's R rating. I knew that I was in for some rather light material, in terms of plot and characters development, but at the same time with some blood and cursing and all the stuff appropriate for this kind of flick, I hoped it should provide fun time at the movies. When there is no real plot to look after, characters are the key factor. Sexy Amber Heard makes for sufficient female side kick for our main hero, but for those who will go for it with hope to get some naked T&A, not this time folks. One guy who easily stole the whole show was fellow played by William Fichtner. He is one of those actors who are around for some time, and you are always happy to see him on the screen, and here he really delivers. It was also really nice to see David Morse, even in a smaller role. So to sum it up, Drive Angry isn't anything special, even for mediocre standards of actioners, but it is watchable and if you are willing to check your brains at the ticket booth, you can give it a go.

Due Date (2010)

Way better than overrated "The Hangover"

[8/10 · 5 November 2010]

Truthfully I wasn't expecting too much from this movie.Based on an early reviews, which gave it clearly bad vibe it was suppose to be mediocre at best, but I was hoping that it could deliver at least few laughs here and there. As it turned out, it is one of the better comedies of 2010 in my honest opinion. Pairing Downey Jr. with Galifianakis was very good idea for a road trip movie plot, and Due Date holds on for all of its 100 minutes thanks to various really funny(sometimes touching) exchanges between two leads. Also we have got cameos of few famous stars(among others: jamie foxx, juliette lewis)which always helps to enrich the story. It is not entirely perfect comedy, there are some weird, and not necessarily funny parts, but those are automatically recompensated, and thankfully outnumbered by those that work just fine. Some critics made complaints about characters not being well written enough, as we don't know great deal about them when the movie ends.I say, this is comedy, not a Thelma & Louise type of road movie movie.It's not a character study, it's humor is based strictly on the dynamics between main players. I almost forgot to mention that DD is very well shot, and some moments really make you appreciate some of the landscape US can offer.

So to sum it up, it is probably my favorite comedy of the year, and although I thought that The Hangover was good(but not "most grossing R rated comedy in history" good), I hope that there will be people who will also find Due Date more pleasant treat.

The Social Network (2010)

Movie about me, movie about you, movie about us

[8/10 · 15 October 2010]

The simple fact that you are reading this review now is a valid point that we feel strong connection to the main subjects included in "The Social Network". What are those subjects? Pursuit of fame, glory, money, recognition, and of course on-lining on a daily basic. I believe that, those are reasons that drove Mr.Zuckerberg(great break out role for Jessie Eisenberg), and his accomplices(also great Justin Timberlake among others) during they journey of making now famous social network system called face book. There are few quite amazing thinks about this film. First of all I must praise it for very good pacing.The whole thing runs for about 2hrs, and it is assembled from scenes of arguing, discussing things etc. yet you will not find any dull moment in the story. Also what I found worth pointing out is that even though this film is filled with high tech slang, you will always be interested in what is happening on screen, even if you are just mildly aware of the possibilities that your good old PC provides. So to sum it up, The Social Network is very timely, and at the same time very universal story about friendships,betrayals,youth and all stupidity that comes with it, and of course about face book...where as a matter of fact this slight review will be submitted.

The Expendables (2010)

Stallone Stallone, What Have Ye Done

[4/10 · 21 August 2010]

First of all this is coming form an ultimate Sly's fan, so it is so much harder to come in terms with what I'm about to write.

I was literally psyched for this movie.I went and seek any info about it during post production, I was looking for any possible picture, sneak peak etc.

But unfortunately after seeing this cinematic mess I have to say that it is one of the worst Sly's films altogether. I know that it was suppose to be throwback to the 80's hence the simplicity and gore, but it cannot ever excuse the chaotic character of this movie.I mean, every scene is like separate film in itself(especially of course infamous church scene-which could've been good if it wasn't so sloppy and mediocre).When you think about it, individual scenes are so independent from the whole picture, that if you'd tell this story backwards it would play out the same way(Dolph is good Dolph is bad Dolph is good, action in the palace, action in the car/warehouse, action with the plane, action with the pirates- so what?nothing comes out from anything).So it was not very good movie for Sly director/screenwriter, so what about Sly actor? I'm first to praise this man for his unique physic, even more so at his age, and it was great to see him in shape for this, but somehow in the movie he doesn't seem very comfortable, and I can't remember when the last time I've seen Stallone so downcast(maybe in Get Carter or D-Tox).

The action itself wasn't too spectacular, with short fights, too fast moving camera, and too noticeable CGI around the end. Even though it is promoted by all those big names(and not every one is so big-Randy Couture, Steve Austin)besides Stallone and Statham rest of the guys, each has barely few lines in the script. From the whole bunch Lundgren was the one standing out, and there was this one great scene from Mickey Rourke(like from another movie). Also you can say that Tyler's score is not bad, and there was nice cinematography here and there.

In overall what we've got from it is a show off from few of our beloved action stars in something that tries to resemble movie but like Arnold's character in it - it is not really up to the task.

Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time (2010)

All action no plot

[4/10 · 27 May 2010]

If you like your movies fast, handsome, colorful, but at the same time deprived of any coherence,unfolding itself with the help of staged action pieces filled with corny characters, than this Prince of Persia may be right down your alley.

I understand that those types of flicks are being made merely to provide some kind of escapism for a viewer for a couple of hours, but it's nice when you can invest your time in the story and make some connection with what's going on on screen.

I mean after we have been exposured to this dagger that can move back time for the person who possesses it at the moment, movie's plot completely loses remains of any credibility. Whoever will die and whatever will happen later on, you know that it may all be turned around when our hero will push a "button" on a dagger. And let me just tell you that there is a lot of pushing button in the movie.

Main evil character played by Sir Ben Kingsley is suppose to turn around bad in about half of the movie's running time, but you know just when you look at him for the first time that he will be there for no good. As this movie is generally about attacking, killing, framing and generally evildoing(without sex, cursing and blood, this is PG13) you need to have comedic relief, and taking into consideration that blacks weren't much popular at those times(although we have one heroically dying here too) we got Alfred Molina playing according to those principals.

So what is in PoP to look for? You can say that arresting landscape, as it was shot on location in Marroco, but yet again there is so much CGI effects here that you cannot really tell what is real and what's not.

And ending of the movie, which I will not give away is very frustrating and plays against audience showing that you can come for the first 15minutes than leave and return for the last 10 and you will literally have seen whole movie.

So when people like to compare which movie based on video game is the best and where this one ranks on that list, I like to point out that it's poor choice to begin with.

Iron Man 2 (2010)

Quite watchable if you know what to expect

[6/10 · 1 May 2010]

When I saw first Iron Man back in 08' I was very pleased with the experience. Robert Dwoney Jr was a fresh revelation as a Tony Stark/Iron Man witty,clever,slick pretentious guy with all the money in the world. His relationship with Gwyneth Paltrow's character was full of chemistry and it was joy to see them playing off of each other. Add to this couple of great cgi and sound effects here and there, simple script with plain anti war message, and you have yourself great blockbuster summer flick. This time around, like in majority of sequels we get all the same, but in multiple proportions in different variations, and like in most of the cases there is almost nothing really new here. Downey Jr. is great again, there is no reason of course to improve on that in any way, also we get to see Mickey Rourke as one of the villains, and I'd say that the way he underplays his character, making him very ominous, mysterious man is most intriguing addition to the formula, as we anticipate while watching the movie for him to come up on screen more often. We get also Scarlet Johannson as a sexy counter proposal to Paltrow's character for Tony's affection, Sam Rockwell as Stark's old rival, and even Sam Jackson lands a bigger(yet very cartoonish) part here. Nevertheless the movie feels juvenile, as despite very intense approach from Rourke(who went to Russia for preparation on his part), we see actions that feel like taken out from video game, which will not be very much exciting for anyone above 15 years old mark. When you see Don Cheadle's face(another great actor on the payroll here-taking over Terrence Howard's part)in the Iron Man style suite batteling with Tony Stark dozens of robots, you don't think about how great he was in "Hotel Rwanda", you think Power Rangers.

All in all I've seen worse comic book movies(Wolverine,Daredevil), I've seen better comic book movies sequels(The Dark Knight, Spider-Man 2). Iron Man 2 is watchable, just don't expect the unexpected.

Brothers (I) (2009)

Compelling drama about various types of war

[8/10 · 1 January 2010]

I've never seen original danish film, on which director Jim Sheridan based his, so my review is entirely free of any comparisons. Brothers tells a story of a family, and shows how significant events in one person's life can affect others around. When Sam(played bravely by Tobey Maguire) gets deployed in Afghanistan and then goes missing and declared dead, his younger brother Tommy(Jake Gyllenhaal) steps up to help Sam's wife Grace(Natalie Portman)who now became alone with two little daughters and house to maintain. Tommy is nothing like his older brother, of which their father(Sam Shepard) can't stop reminding him. But now feeling responsible to help Grace, he can channel his guilt and grief by doing good deeds around the household.He even renovates the kitchen. During this time we see as Tommy's bond with Grace and children tightens. It won't be much of a spoiler when I write that later on Sam prove himself to be alive(every video merchandise of this movie shows that)and eventually reunited with his family at home in US. But like I wrote at the beginning almost everything has changed since he left. Can he forget events he was displayed to at war? We've seen many different movies about coming home from war, and trying to deal with ordinary life once again, after being exposed to devastating things, but the way Tobey Maguire portrays it, being locked up within himself, coping with PTSD behavior, is spectacular. In fact acting from all three leads is the strongest virtue of Sheridan's movie. If you can say something unflattering about "Brothers" it is that script seems quite conventional, the way story unfolds. It is very strong movie,you may not fall in love with it as it is rather sad and dark but you're ought to admire and respect it for not sugarcoating anything, just showing how complex and rather grey than black or whit life tends to be.

The Wrestler (2008)

Motion picture that under it's simple title, hides so many layers of common real life emotions

[10/10 · 2 January 2009]

First of all, let me tell you that those kinds of movies don't happen too often, and when you think about this sort, you know that there's only handful similarly well made productions every decade or so. Like with its straight on title, all the beauty of "The Wrestler" lays in its simplicity. This is the story of one man, Randy "The Ram" Robinson. He is a Wrestler. His heydays are long gone but he still hangs on to this profession(as I think we may call wrestling) that gave him so much over the years, but also through Randy's absolute dedication, made his life outside the ring rather shallow and empty. We see that being the truth, when after one brutal match(which is shown in very violent way) Randy experiences heart attack, and is told to put his wrestling gigs aside.Then he faces many tough encounters with new reality, like confrontation with his estranged daughter(played beautifully by Evan Reachel Wood) with whom Randy would very much like to make the peace but after all lost years it may not be possible, and we see him doing different types of honest hard work, he would take to make a living. Randy's other interest besides wrestling is his relationship with the stripper named Cassidy(another award worthy performance from Marisa Tomei).She is Randy's maybe only soul-mate to whom he can freely talk about anything. She resembles Randy in that she also does use her body as a way to make money, but to both of them there is more then meets the eye. Thanks to film's low budget you can relate to all the events more then usual. Almost whole think was shot with using hand-held cameras, and it gives you the feeling of authenticity, like you were there with Randy. Music composed by Clint Mansell is very subtle, and we have fair share of famous 80's hard-rock songs. All the parallels between Randy's character and Mickey Rourke's real life are very much intended, probably because of that he was able to play this part so well, almost effortless. As for the wrestling matches there are some very impressive stunts there , and allegedly Mickey Rourke did all his moves by himself, for those show scenes separately he deserves some kind of recognition. It's a very raw and honest movie, you feel for all the characters, and how they interact with each other, partially thanks to those very honest performances, and also by beautiful straightforward direction in which Darren Aranofsky shot this film. It is one not to be missed, you may laugh you may cry, and you will know by the end of it, that you were treated with something special.

Quantum of Solace (2008)

It's everything that The Dark Knight was not...in terms of a bad sequel

[7/10 · 7 November 2008]

Personally I'm not one of those people who regret that Bond is less "bondish" lately, without his famous drink, without his tag line etc etc. I really digged this new raw simple image of agent 007 in Casino Royale, but problem in QOS lays someplace else. Basic problem here is the script, which is plenty on action, and little on character development. Craig is doing what he can with what he got, but what he mostly encounters here are variety of chases, which are quite nice to watch, but I don't think, anyone will say that they match up with famous African rundown or Miami international action scenes from it's predecessor. Also we know that there must be something wrong with pace of the movie when 107min feels much longer than 144min of CR. But what made me really displeased with this movie, is that as I mentioned in the topic, in comparison to for example The Dark Knight(which was above many good thinks, sequel that did stand on it's own)QOS feels too much as a in between movie, and it is very much fault of it's script. Everything goes too much by the numbers, Bond just floats through entire picture, and then it's over, with of course cliffhanger ending. So generally this movie has his fair share of solid elements, mostly in terms of good acting, interesting villain, "bourne a like" camera-work, and always solid score from David Arnold(although once again not as good as previously), and on the downside like it's cold blood hero lack of heart and also originality.It's like Bond doesn't want to feel for him, and so we the audience don't. But hey, it's still better than many poor entries in the series, maybe Casino Royale was bar settled too high.