Change Your Image
RubenJansen97
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Lists
An error has ocurred. Please try againReviews
Beauty and the Beast (2017)
It still manages to enjoy and surprise some moments. Sadly they forgot to tell a realistic feeling love story between the Beauty and a Beast.
*No major spoilers, some minor plot points are discussed.*
Characters and Acting: So the original cast was perfect. In this remake there are only a few actors that feel perfect. I mostly like Luke Evans as Gaston, I thought he was excellent. Some of the supporting cast is close to improving over the original. Especially Ewan Mccregor and Sir Ian McKellen steal the show. They really seem to capture the spirit of their characters. With these people being pretty much perfect, everyone else is just 'good.' Emma Watson as Belle sort of fits the part. She has a good heart as Belle, and she can stand for herself when she needs to, but it still looks like she is just being Emma Watson for most of the time. The Beast is sadly one of the film most weak parts. I don't feel like he makes such a development over the course of two hours.
Story and Dialogue: The story is as expected mostly the same as the original. There are a few changes here and there, but some of them don't seem to add anything new to it, it's just done with the purpose of being different. There are here and there some added scenes that we never knew before about Belle or where she came from that are nice to know, but it eventually goes nowhere. My biggest disappointment however is the fact that I have only one flaw with the 1991 version; that being that the part where they fall in love goes kind of fast. With this film being around two hours, I was hoping they would improve my only flaw with the original. Sadly they didn't. Even worse: they pay even less time on the connection between Belle and the Beast, which would be the point of the entire movie. Right now it feels more like Belle stays at the castle because she has a good connection with the servants instead of the Beast.
Editing and Pacing: The editing in the movie is fine. It doesn't stand out, but it also doesn't distract you, so it does its job. The pacing however could be improved. When the 50-minute mark hit, I was asking myself if they would give the Beast some screen time. For the length this movie had it's a letdown that there is so less development in the relation between Belle and the Beast.
Music and Sound: Thankfully the makers noticed that you can't improve over the classical musical score of the original one, so its mostly the same. The singing however shifts from really good to laughably bad auto-tuning. I already said that Gaston sounded the best, also because Luke Evans really acted the singing in the scenes that he sung. When I see Emma Watson's Belle singing, it really sounds like it is recorded in a studio, and later dubbed in the movie. I believe the actors do sing nice, but I can't tell if they had to fix singing errors from the recording or if they just screwed up the sound mixing.
Cinematography and Effects: The movies gives a very good impression of how the look of the animated movie would look in real life. I love the design of the sets and the attributes. For the CGI effects, sometimes it looks great and so real you can swear you can touch everything you can see on the screen. But then there are also some scenes you swear you are watching a Pixar animated Disney film. Especially the big landscape shots really look distracting. Then you also have the Beast, who sometimes looks like he is actually there, but sometimes there are some awkward shots, like when he lays in bed, you wonder why one his horns keeps disappearing so weirdly behind his pillow.
Rewatchability: In terms of a watch I'd say: 'Sure, go watch this movie. Once.' For a re-watch, i'd say: 'Watch the original.' It's nice to have the knowledge of some added scenes that give some characters more backstory, but in the end it doesn't make this movie more special. Watch the old one again, with the knowledge that you get with this movie.
Deeper Meaning or Motives/Themes: The story has a beautiful message about beauty being not everything, it's about what is inside someone. Sadly I don't feel like I've experienced this message much in this movie. It's the fact that I know the story and I have already learned the message from the original, but I feel like this version doesn't express its main theme enough. Sadly they forgot to add the awesome red/blue color motive, look it up!
Tone: One more thing the movie does well is give a good mix between live- action and over-the-top animation humor and style. The sometimes over-the-top acting really fits in the movie, while also giving a sense that the characters are still actual people. This is hard to do and I give the movie credit for succeeding in tone.
Personal Response: I thought the first 45 minutes of the movie were the best. I almost wish they would transform the added scenes into animation style and add it to the 1991 version. After that it falls kind of flat, mainly because of the lack of interest in the Beast, which is a shame. Love should come from two sides, so it takes more that just developing Belle to keep us interested. I did enjoy the movie, but it is just a single time watch for me.
Conclusion: Seeing how it was a risk to remake one of the best animated movies of all time, Beauty and the Beast (2017) still manages to enjoy and surprise some moments. Sadly the filmmakers forgot to give the focus on the core story line that makes the original so good, that being a realistic feeling love story between the Beauty and a Beast.
Me and Earl and the Dying Girl (2015)
'Me and Earl and the Dying Girl' is a believable film with wonderful portrayed characters and with great things to say about illness, social life and creativity. 10/10
Tiltle: Me and Earl and the Dying Girl (2015) – No Spoilers!
Characters and acting: One of the biggest pro's I can give this this movie is that all of the characters felt real in their motivations, reactions, emotions and the way they delivered their lines. The main character is portrayed by Thomas Mann. I haven't seen him in any other films, but judging by his age, he has a great career to look forward to. His chemistry with Rachel (played by Olivia Cooke) is spectacular. Not only is the build up done so well, but the way they deliver lines at each other and how the create inside jokes is a pleasure to witness on screen. I could talk for ages about the great actors in this movie, but the best way to describe them is 'real'.
Story and Dialogue: The story is surprisingly simple, but that doesn't take away from the fact that the execution of it has been done with care. Thankfully the filmmakers knew about the fact that you have probably heard this story numerous times, so they found a believable way to sort of make fun of it without taking away from the tone. The dialogue is often so fun and relate able. It is filled with clever jokes or comments about high school, life or sickness. This is the type of movie where you want to grab your phone or your notes every few minutes to write down that awesome quote.
Editing and Pacing: In these types of movies I'm always kind of nervous if there isn't a long middle-part where the pace hugely goes down. The length is as perfect as it can be. If it was longer it could have become boring and if it was shorter it would have been too rushed. In the terms of editing it has definitely some stand-out moments, there are some really fun stop-motion segments or creative filmmaking bits (keeping things vague because of spoilers).
Cinematography and Effects: The cinematography in this film is just lovely to watch. Not only are there some really neat camera tricks but it makes use of the entire screen instead of just the middle. Aside from that, the colors and the symmetry in the short look awesome, it actually manages to make high school look beautiful. Also a lot of repetition is found between several shots with different meanings, you can really see that the filmmakers put effort in making a film with usage of visual ques to tell a story.
Rewatchability: In a lot of movies like this I feel like there normally isn't much rewatchability value. Once you finally know what's going to happen it could make your second viewing less interesting. I feel like the value in this film is much greater though, mostly because of the combination of great characters mixed with genuine dialogue. I was so invested in the characters that I would mind seeing them a second, third or perhaps even a fourth time. In terms of foreshadowing, there is quite a lot of it, some of it in some small character moments that you wouldn't even notice when paying not enough attention. This would definitely make your second watching worth wile.
Deeper Meaning or Motives/Themes: This movie has quite a lot to say about dealing with illness (obviously), finding your place in school or in your social life, having friends, showing yourself and being who you are and showing your creativity.
Tone: The tone of the movie is so interesting. I should say it's a drama, but on the other hand, this movie is funny as hell, but I also wouldn't consider this a comedy. It's like a drama with great comedic elements. Aside from that the tone is really consistent and it didn't do anything that took me out of the movie, I stayed invested throughout the entire film.
Personal Response: With the smart and fun dialogue this movie grabbed me pretty quick. Then after a while I became invested in the characters. After like half an hour I was wondering if they would go the easy way with the story. Then the movie surprisingly took a few turns that I didn't expect and it kept me interested in the story. Something really interesting that this movie did to me which had never occurred to me before was that I felt the emotion several minutes after the movie had ended. Normally there are certain scenes that give you the feels, but this time I felt it after and it still kept me engaged. When a movie can accomplish something like that, it earns my deepest respect.
Conclusion: 'Me and Earl and the Dying Girl' is a believable film with wonderful portrayed characters and with great things to say about illness, social life and creativity. 10/10
Source Code (2011)
Source Code is an above average movie that could have been better, but the final result is fine. 7/10
Characters and acting: First of all, Jake Gyllenhaal has proved himself. He's great in the role. Everyone else if fine. There isn't much character motivation or development, but characters are likable or understandable. There isn't much emotion though, except for a touching scene that (minor spoilers) involves a conversation between a character and his/her father.
Story and dialogue: The story is what makes this movie. It's awesome and original. Despite some plot holes near the third act. The dialogue is fine, but sometimes there is too much exposition or the lines aren't exactly 'human'.
Editing and pacing: Nothing spectacular or outstanding, but it does the job well. Let's say you wouldn't notice it anything good or bad.
Cinematography and effects: Some really nice shots in this movie, but others are lacking. With some beautiful wide shots, but on the other hand some dark, barely visible shots. The effects aren't the best, but the movie doesn't rely on them, only uses them when necessary, they are fine for the size this movie has.
Deeper meaning or motives/themes: Barely any, perhaps something that has to do with free will, or being human, but that's not really addressed.
Tone: Mysterious, suspenseful.
Emotional response: I was invested and excited. Wanted to know where the story would go.
Rating: Source Code is an above average movie to watch on an evening with friends. Don't expect a great movie but a fun movie. 7/10