Reviews

5 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Colombiana (2011)
6/10
Neo-Eurospy by the numbers
10 April 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Enigmatic anti-hero driven by revenge? Check. Intricately planned heist-style section? Check. Ridiculously over-the-top foreign villains? Check. Ludicrous acrobatic gun-play? Check. A good cop caught up in the middle? Check. "Colombiana" has all the features you'd expect. It's just that it doesn't do anything else. The best of the genre throws something else into the mix and takes some risks. "Colombiana" just decides to play it safe.

This doesn't make it a bad film, however, just an average one. Performances are solid without being outstanding. The script is functional rather than sizzling. The direction is thrilling without be exhilarating. If you want to disconnect your brain for an hour and a half and enjoy some daft action then you could do a lot worse than "Colombiana". However, if you want something a bit more then you'll need to go elsewhere.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Fringe (2008–2013)
8/10
A worthy successor to "The X-Files"
9 April 2014
Warning: Spoilers
It's interesting to read the older reviews here, especially those from the middle of the first season. They are absolutely right in that it was a bit of a stinker but how wrong they look now, taking the series as a whole. In fact, it's quite amazing that we even got to be able to talk about the series as a whole considering how bad that first season was. I got to the point that I was watching it to laugh at it rather than anything else. Oh, and to see what Walter would say next.

If anything saved "Fringe" from being an obscure footnote in the big book of sci-fi TV it was John Noble's portrayal of Walter Bishop. An acid-mashed genius who could flick between insightful poignancy and hilarious irreverence in the blink of an eye, Walter quickly became the heart of the show. Over time we became more aware of his duplicity and would question his motives more but initially we all just fell in love with him.

Once the show really began to explore the parallel universe then the rest of the cast got to flex their acting muscles. Anna Torv whose Olivia Dunham had started off as wooden caricature ended up creating two brilliant believable and sympathetic characters. Jasika Nicole created a wonderful tribute to her sister in her alternate Astrid without once slipping into caricature. And of course, Walternate himself provided us with a delicious villain, one with very believable (and often not unreasonable) motives and desires.

The stories themselves were, at times, convoluted and confusing messes relying on Walter's dues ex machina but there was always enough of a thread to keep them linked together and to keep pushing the mystery on. The final season was cut short (made just long enough for syndication) and after the four previous ones it shows. It's a shame because there's enough of the writers' original vision still there that you can see what it could have been. However, the fact that pretty much any of the middle seasons' episodes stands up by itself shows how good the writing was.

The romantic and familial relationships that often end up being distracting subplot fillers in shows like were allowed to develop naturally over time to the point that we, as an audience, almost felt part of the "Fringe" family ourselves. The writers went one better, however, and eventually made these relationships not only vital to the central plot but also to the theme of the show. If, at the end of it all, "Fringe" taught us anything it was something about the importance and sacrifice of parenthood, a lot more than any of its contemporaries ever attempted.

In the end "Fringe" was a wonderful moment of cult TV. Despite J.J. Abrams original intent, it doesn't really reward the casual viewer. However, for loyal followers willing to put in the time, it was, and will continue to be, a entertaining, moving, exciting, thrilling slice of sci-fi genius.
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Colony (I) (2013)
5/10
A mixed-up mess leads to a missed opportunity
9 April 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Firstly, let's make this clear: "The Colony" is a B movie and needs to be reviewed as such. Unfortunately "The Colony" doesn't actually know what sort of B movie it is. It's sure enough that it's post-apocalyptic but after that it gets a bit lost. Is it an intelligent, sci-fi thriller? Or would it rather be a full-on zombie-style action flick complete with blood and gore? In the end it tries to be both and ends up falling somewhere between the two.

It starts well enough, setting up a slightly preposterous but logically thought out apocalypse, taking time to explore that and also the relationships between the survivors, highlighting tensions and foreshadowing future conflict. However, after that it chucks all that to one side and devotes an awful to of time and effort to a conflict with zombie-style cannibals. Before going back to the original conflicts. And then repeating itself with another cannibals showdown.

This flitting back and forth means that neither section really gets developed enough or receives the conclusion that it deserves. If they'd either done away with the cannibals and focused on the internal conflict between the survivors or brushed over the actually reasons behind the apocalypse to free up time for full-on, seat-of-your-pants cannibal terror then "The Colony" could have ended up a cult gem. Instead in ends up as a highly forgettable mess.

Which is a real shame as you've got a good cast and a great setting. Both Laurence Fishburne and Bill Paxton do the best they can with the material they've been given but neither really gets enough screen time and there really isn't enough time of them facing off against each other. The former NORAD headquarters has a great post-apocalyptic vibe and makes for a very pretty backdrop but if more time had been spent in one of the silos rather than dividing time between two then it could really have come to life. I wanted to see crawlspaces, walls blown through, traps made with the facilities. We get none of that.

So, in summation, a missed opportunity due to the writer failing to actually decide which film he wanted to make before he started writing.
8 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Believe (2014)
6/10
Currently not living up to its potential
8 April 2014
Warning: Spoilers
This review is written after the fourth episode.

"Believe" was released with much fanfare. With Alfonso Cuarón and J.J. Abrams on-board and a very pretty trailer to wet audience's appetites, it looked like this couldn't fail. However, within a few episodes the same complaint seemed to be levelled against it time and time again: too formulaic.

Now, for a TV show, formulaic isn't always a problem. Plenty of TV shows run off a formula. In fact plenty of TV shows wouldn't work if they didn't have the formula. The audience likes the formula. It comforts them, reassures them. It means that when you tune in for the show you know what you're going to get.

However, "Believe" use of the formula is flawed. Every episode has three parts to it. There's Bo and Tate's attempts to stay one step ahead of their pursuers. Then there's Bo's attempts to help someone in need. Finally there is something related to Skouras, often in the form of a flashback. There are three main problems with this. Firstly, cramming three separate story lines into a single show means there's not enough time to develop any of them properly.

Secondly, there is precious little variation in these parts, especially in what should be the most exciting part, Bo and Tate's flight from danger. A safe-house goes south, Tate has a heated phone call with Milton about getting them help, they are cornered by their pursuers, Bo uses her powers to save them, Milton comes through at the end. There's no drama or tension, no change or development in Agent Ferrel's character, nothing to make the audience intrigued.

Finally, there is no overlap between these parts. Plenty of shows have different story lines running through them. The best ones tie these story lines together, often in ways that the audience least expect. Bo's missions-of-mercy seemingly exist in a vacuum, despite everything else that is happening in her life. Agent Ferrel interacts a little with Skouras but despite all the lies she's been told and all that she's seen, she continues to act as little more than a plot device, relentlessly pursing Bo without once questioning what she's asked to do.

The other big problem "Believe" has is due to Bo's abilities. This show could work nicely if they focused on Bo's crusades and kept the other parts in the background as an ongoing storyline that could pop-up from time to time and be allowed to slowly develop over the course of the season. However, for that to succeed there needs to be some sort of mystery but with Bo's abilities that's never going to happen. She knows the resolution to the mystery even before it begins. If there was more room for Tate to play a part or if Bo's abilities weren't perfect then maybe this could work but as it stands it leaves little for the audience to engage with.

Despite all of that "Believe" isn't completely without worth. The whole concept is solid enough, the performances are good and the dialogue is better than a lot of TV shows. It's also beautiful to look at, and to listen to. It's just that, as it stands, nothing is being done with all of that. If the plot gets a work over and actually starts to develop rather than just tread water then "Believe" has the potential to be a great show. If not then this isn't going to get past season one.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
A missed opportunity
5 April 2014
Warning: Spoilers
I went into this with an open mind. I'd caught the trailer on YouTube and it looked intriguing, reminiscent, I thought of "The Long Walk" (a guilty pleasure of mine). I'd also read some of the reviews, the ones slating the poor acting and low budget. I've seen some great movies with low budgets and poor acting ("Tunnel" or "The Poughkeepsie Tapes" for example) so I figured that maybe there might be a hidden gem here, one overlooked by all the haters. Sadly I was wrong.

The trivia section suggests that this was filmed over the course of several years and it shows. Not only does the plot (what there is of it) feel very disjointed but the whole style seems to alter almost randomly. Often it feels as if the director has read about a new technique and just wants to experiment with it. Some of these techniques such as the hand-held camera in the office chairs are actually pretty neat but because the director doesn't stick with one style throughout the film loses any sense of unity.

There's also the issue with the plot. There are a couple of lengthy flashbacks that seem to serve no purpose later on, as if the writer changed his mind about the film's direction after they'd been filmed. Then, once the film proper is underway he brings it neatly under control before realising he doesn't know what to do next. So, he changes direction again, upping the action and gore in a truly ludicrous fashion (the fight scene with the amputee veteran is probably the nadir of the film in this regard).

However, in amongst all this there are some good points. The performances might not be Oscar worthy but they are solid enough and some of the relationships are nicely drawn, especially between the two veterans and also the deaf couple. There are also a couple of nice scenes, notably with the pregnant woman and the cyclist and the old marine and the veteran. There's also the setting with its seemingly random safe spots and oppressing atmosphere.

But then we come to the reveal. This is where it lost most of its points. Up until this point this has been a mildly intriguing look at the way people interact under stress. There are some nods towards religion and to modern society that hint that maybe this film has a point to make, some sort of message to impart. Had the reveal somehow linked to this, even in a way I disagreed about, I might have seen some worth in this enterprise. Instead the reveal turns the whole film into little more than a genre film (and a cheap genre film with rubbish CGI at that). There's nothing wrong with being a genre film but you're going to need to do a whole lot better than this if you want to stand up against the far better examples that are out there (eg "Battle Royale").
14 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed