The jReviews trial license has expired. To remove this message you need to upgrade to the full version or uninstall jReviews and all it's modules and plugins.

Reviews written by Flignats

5 results - showing 1 - 5

Results per page:

The Reader

Movie Reviews

An onslaught of emotional confliction, love, and despair

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful

An intense, emotional drama set in Post WWII Germany. An instant masterpiece!

Review

Review	So many words can describe The Reader, each from varying angles, but I think dilemma is the most prevalent emotion throughout the film. Kate Winslet, Ralph Fiennes, and David Kross were all able to embody confliction and expressed the same emotion each in a different way. While the script was amazing, it was really the actors that made the story come alive. The unwavering attention to the characters emotions really shown through the actors while carrying out their performances was nothing short of Kate Winslet’s deservingness of the Oscar award. My only surprise is that neither of the other two main actor’s gained attention for their supporting roles. I hope that David Kross is picked up for movies in the United States. The drama is already packed into an uncomfortable environment, the holocaust aftermath, but this goes farther by burying it into the effects it had on the Germans; and even further into unease with the adult-child, very sexual, relationship. Kate Winslet’s character demands respect, in the beginning, and we are only but obliged to give it to her. She and Kross’ characters cross ordinarily, but the ensuing interactions are far beyond that. After a seemingly endless eye locking engagement between her and the young boy, whilst Winslet in a sexually compromising position, leads off to Winslet’s unforeseen forwardness. However immoral the relationship may be, when combined with the genuineness and innocence, I was drawn to encourage the interactions. As it turned out, we were only, cruelly, setup for an emotional breakdown. From there on, the story remains to stay in a torment of confliction. Winslet’s past catches up to her and lands her in the hot seat in a German court, for her involvement as a guard in Auschwitz. Years after she left Kross, he sees his lost love being sentenced for crimes more harshly pinned on her than what really happened. All the while Kross is in possession of information that could have freed her from the life sentence, but is faced with the decision of releasing that information or not. Whilst being separated for more than 20 years, Kross and Winslet each struggle with their own demons and the long awaited encounter results in further entrapment for our emotions. My own struggle was with my desire to be set free from the binding ties the story had put over me, constantly seeking to be liberated from its hold. I thought I would have been granted that mercy, at least at the end; however, these writers had not acquired that quality. This will become an instant classic in anyone’s collection. It doesn’t get too much better than this when seeking a talented cast, performances, and writing.
Additional Remarks	A must see movies, don't let the romance fool you! This is for everyone (except kids) to enjoy.
Recommended?	Yes

Overall rating:		8.1
Story:		8.0
Actor Performance:		9.0
Cinematography:		7.0
Sound Track:		8.0

Was this review helpful to you?
Yes

Reviewed by Flignats
March 06, 2009

Report this review

Revanche

Movie Reviews

Hard to get through, but worth the wait.

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

This is worth the watch if you can stomach the wait. Trust me, it get's good.

Review

Review	First off, if you can’t handle subtitles than you better be able to understand German / Russian. Revanche is a movie about a prostitute, scoundrel, weakened cop, self justified adulterous, and a weathered old man. This movie is going to test your patience, but as it turns out it is actually worth the wait. We are inundated with sexuality in the beginning; this isn’t a movie to have the kids around. Many other countries have a nonchalant attitude towards the human body. Our scoundrel and prostitute are a couple and they have plans to remove her from the brothel she attends. However, their boss has other plans for her (cater to politicians and businessman) and the only way out is to take off under the radar. In order to accomplish this they need some cash, the easiest way to do that is by, of course, robbing a bank. From there the lives of the adulterous, cop, and old man are intertwined into the story. The cinematography was fluent, but it had an all too obvious way to communicate to us. The director chose to linger, for what seemed an awkward amount of time, at certain scenes to tell us they have significance in the future. Usually, a director can do this without spending 5 seconds on a still image. Besides, it’s enjoyable to the watcher to be able to go back through and pick out those significances in the movie on their own. Fortunately the worth of the film resides in the characters and actor performance. Although our scoundrel is a bad guy, robbing a bank, the story does a good job of not making us hate him, especially when he gets his girlfriend killed. We would be inclined to despise or feel angry towards him, but his attitude and actions can only make us feel sorry. When combined with the background of the police offer, it pushes us into a further alliance with our scoundrel. It really takes about 1 hour and 15 minutes for this movie to become interesting, this is when all of the characters are consistently interacting with one another. We never leave the old man’s side, all the time knowing what his ending will be, but hoping there would be something we could do for him; which we know would only need to be spending some quality time with him. The adulterous inspires only pity and resentment. I’m not sure if that was the intent, but her persona isn’t strong and we can only assign the blame of her actions back onto her. The police officer’s initial scene set the foundation of our view for him; and as a result I never got a chance to feel sympathetic for him. The scoundrel is the real prize out of the characters. He is surprising, while being predictable, if that’s possible. The whole film we can see a struggle behind his eyes, a constant tug of war, and a void… just empty. The actors’ consistency had won me over by the end of the movie. The script was great in that characters persona’s were authentic. However, if you don’t have patience or are looking for continuous eventful scenes, you won’t like this.
Additional Remarks	It's a sleeper, about 1 hour and 15 minutes into the movie you'll get hooked and want to watch it.
Recommended?	Yes

Overall rating:		7.4
Story:		7.0
Actor Performance:		8.0
Cinematography:		6.0
Sound Track:		9.0

Was this review helpful to you?
Yes

Reviewed by Flignats
February 27, 2009

Report this review

Ken Park

Movie Reviews

A Disturbingly Amazing Film

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful

Push the envelop of comprehension through this disturbing and twisted take on suburban teenagers' lives.

Review

Review	Shocking? Riveting? Eye opening? Yes, yes, yes, and many more to follow. Ken Park was a beautifully crafted creation of Larry Clark’s. Most people don’t know Larry Clark’s work, probably because he is one of the most controversial writer / directors in cinema. His main work concentrates on teen’s lives, their culture, and he never holds back from the brutal reality of what it is. If you haven’t seen his most recognized movie, Kids, I suggest you run out and get it, although you might have a hard time finding it. Ken Park was so explicit that it was banned in Australia, never found a distributor in the United States, and was not shown in the United Kingdom (this may be due to Larry Clark punching and strangling the head of the UK Distribution). Ken Park revolves around the lives of several teenagers in Visalia, California. Each of the teens resides in an abusive home, attached with abusive relationships. The initial scene contains a teen’s suicide (not a spoiler). The remaining movie, and a motive for the suicide, depicts the teenagers in a silo filled with sexuality, sexual experimentation, incest, violence, and murder. The 4 main characters make up a click of friends, each with their own story flowing through the greater plot of the movie. Intertwining each element (stated above), Larry Clark paints a portrait of dysfunction that many people would not have been able to imagine. The lives of the characters, the plot, will expose new aspects of life that do no doubt exist in parts of America, but will have you questioning if it’s even possible. The chemistry between all of the characters is extraordinary, in no way awkward, although each situation is pushing the envelope of comprehension. Sean’s persona, independence, and actions can all be derived from his upbringing, which we can clearly justify by the short interludes at his home. Although, they are in no way innocent, we can’t help but feel empathetic in his actions and almost justifiable. Peaches is struggling to explore herself, sexually, while abiding by an extremely religious and delusional father. He is so exacerbated by his wife’s death that he finds twisted solace in the resemblance of her in his daughter. Claude is confined both physically and mentally, restricted by a drunk father who abuses him because of his suspicion of his son’s homosexuality. While displaying homosexual undertones, explicit heterosexual activity lands us in a field of uncertainty as we try to disseminate through his actions to arrive at a clear answer. Take violence, aggression, sexual disturbances, a fractured psyche, and 1 disturbed individual, Tate, and you’ll have a good start at seeing what this character is capable of. Compress all of these emotions, only to release them in sporadic brutal bursts set off by simple signs of affection; finally setting himself free by committing an atrocious finale without any display of remorse. Starting to get an idea of the message Larry Clark wants to communicate? There are dysfunctional teenagers out there in the suburban neighborhoods. These characters are examples of some extreme cases, but the environments that created them are not extreme; and that should make us all more aware of what can derive from our upbringings.
Additional Remarks	It's hard to find, you'll have to buy it from the internet.
Recommended?	Yes

Overall rating:		9.1
Story:		10.0
Actor Performance:		9.0
Cinematography:		8.0
Sound Track:		9.0

Was this review helpful to you?
Yes

Reviewed by Flignats
February 25, 2009

Report this review

Last updated: February 25, 2009

Friday the 13th (2009)

Movie Reviews

A great start in remaking the American Classic

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful

A must watch for any horror fan! Derek Mears does justice to Jason Voorhees. A great American Slasher that cannot go unseen!

Review

Review	29 years from the original Friday the 13th, Marcus Nispel had no easy feat to overcome when directing the latest in this series. After franchise flops like Jason Takes Manhattan and Jason X it would seem that it would be nearly impossible to not supersede the expectations of its audiences. However, from its cult following, the new generation that has yet to enjoy this mass murderer, and the “always anticipating a good horror film” audience, we’ve set the bar pretty high; as shown by its record breaking opening weekend of $42 million+. At first you might not think Marcus Nispel to be qualified for such a task, with his portfolio containing the lackluster Pathfinder and a collection of directed music videos, but one movie did place him as an industry favorite and that was the remake of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Combine that with a Hollywood budget, a surprising cast, and a well written script and Friday the 13th turned out to be a success. Firstly, this is an American Slasher film and I think some of the critics out there may have forgotten that. The intro was entertaining and setup a nice foundation for getting us back into the Jason Voorhees atmosphere, just what we needed after 6 years of absence from this psychopath. I especially loved the way they showed the kills, it was a sufficient tribute to the 80’s style slasher films. Now, back to the American horror; our slasher films are known for kills, partying, sex, and the cliché American cast. Of course this includes the Jock or Frat boy, who is rich, the beautiful girls (usually at least 1 not so intelligent and almost always only 1 intelligent), the stoners, a creepy old person, and the “hard” rebel guy. All of this, of course, was included. To dock the movie for that would be pointless, as we were all expecting it as a crucial mix to the movie itself. They did do a good job of updating the scenario’s; we now have topless wakeboarding and the search for fields of marijuana to add to the list of No-No’s if you want to be killed off in a Slasher film. What I liked even more was that they didn’t leave as many holes in the script in regards to Jason’s capabilities. Instead of ‘magic’ being is ability to appear behind you unnoticed, we now know that Jason is actually pretty intelligent in the engineering sector. Throughout his stay at Camp Crystal Lake he’s been able to dig himself an intricate tunnel system; among collecting dolls, wheelchairs, and anything else an unlucky hiker might bring with them during their vacations. Not to mention that they specifically show you his collection of archery trophies after pulling off a seemingly impossible kill, they didn’t want to leave us with too many statements to debunk this character’s capabilities. The victims did a nice job of being just that, victims. The acting was done nicely, even down to the attitudes that they each needed to have; which I’ve already mentioned were cliché, but work perfectly for this script. The quips were updated, they evoked laughs when needed, and… other physical reactions when intended to do so. You connected with them they way they wanted you too, which sometimes isn’t the easiest to do. The only strife I had was that I would have liked to have seen more group scenes, for friends going away for the weekend, I didn’t get that connection between each of them; it was more awkward than not. I’ll be looking forward to the next installment, which I am curious just what they intended this one to be. It wasn’t exactly a remake, for anyone who’s seen the original you know what I mean, but it wasn’t a extension of the series either. It’s as if they want to start from the beginning, but expect us to have knowledge of him already. They did however go through how Jason became Jason, which would dump us at the second part of the series, after his mom passes. So I’ll be anxiously waiting to watch Derek Mears on the big screen again, terrorizing whatever passes through his camp.
Additional Remarks	The chromatography felt too dark in the beginning. Also, there were some gray areas between actor relationships.
Recommended?	Yes

Overall rating:		7.9
Story:		8.0
Actor Performance:		8.0
Cinematography:		7.0
Sound Track:		9.0

Was this review helpful to you?
Yes

Reviewed by Flignats
February 16, 2009

Report this review

Still Waiting

Movie Reviews

A HUGE Dissapointment

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful

Do not waste your time watching this one. You may have the impulse to reconnect with the warm attachment of the cult classic, Waiting, but deciding to watch this will only set yourself up for failure.

Review

Sometimes you can come across a straight to video movie that completely surpasses you expectations, especially since they [the expectations] are low to begin with. Usually the prequels setup the following movie in a good enough position to prevent it from disappointing; Waiting had been an immensely hilarious movie, even through the clichés. However, this STDvd had failed beyond what I thought it could.

Kevin McKittrick had won me over with Waiting, but I don’t know what he was thinking when he wrote and directed this one. My only best guess is that he reaped the profits off of the first film and knew he had done so well that he sacrificed an A list cast for a piece of work that would line is pockets once again; only this time at the expense of its audience. Which is a shame to think about when he previously disclosed that his inspiration had come from such a great filmmaker, Kevin Smith.

Unlike the comedic and witty conversations, games, and traditions among the original cast, Still Waiting focused more on the manager’s (John Michael Higgins) depressing life and Calvin’s (Rob Benedict) new found confidence in “winning” over women. The restaurant industry humor that made Waiting a cult classic was nowhere present in its sequel. The few attempts at comedy had come across as no more than crude or intellectually diminishing. Between the scat, racism, disability, and overly sexual humor [lack of] I had laughed maybe twice; all the while thinking that this couldn’t have been written by the same person, because he had succeeded so beautifully previously. Unfortunately, the only relief that had washed over me had come when Justin Long made his far too short appearance. When he and David Koechner shared a scene it was as if I was stranded in the desert for days without water and came across a mirage of an oasis; I was reminded of something I knew and loved, but I couldn’t be sure that it was real.

It’s understandable that Kevin McKittrick would not be able to get the same cast again, many of them had all moved on to larger and higher paying jobs, quickly. However, the amount of talent sacrificed in the new cast essentially bled the script from any connection with its audience. Albeit, I’m not sure even Ryan Reynolds could have made his replacements script look any better, so the majority of the blame falls on the writing. I’d be willing to go in with positive expectations, to other films, for some of the actors. Unfortunately, I don’t think this film will be a major breakthrough, launching their careers, that some of them had anticipated.

Flignats
www.movie-critic.net

Recommended?