A Trip to the Moon (1902) review

(9/10)

     Clocking in at only fifteen minutes, A Trip to the Moon is more of a short masterpiece than a film. However, its significance in time and the sheer creativity of the show earn it just as much, if not more, respect than most films throughout history. The short, silent picture is a masterpiece of its time, delivering just as much fantasy and awe today as it did back in its original days- thanks to the gift of film preservation.

PLOT: An enlightened astronomer plans a casual trip to the moon with some of the townspeople. The astronomer and others build a torpedo-shaped rocket and launch him into space. The rocket touches down (in the man in the moon's eye, no less) and the astronomer is then encountered with some strange aliens. There isn't a lot of substance to the plot, as it is very short and basic. However, what the creators and performers were able to accomplish with props and costumes at that time in history was quite amazing. Film hadn't become as broad and accessible yet, so this was a special show to see in its day. It's still special now, thanks to the miracle of film preservation and the creativity of the entertainers.

ACTING: Though there isn't anything to say about speech in the film, there is a lot to say about the performers. The performers wide-spreading gestures and sporadic movements really brought the film to life. A film doesn't need the medium of speech if conveyed accurately through emotion, which these actors achieved ultimately.

SCORE/SOUNDTRACK: I'm not sure what the original music played aside this film was, or if there even was music, but either choice would have been better than the background music that Netflix provides with the film. The music on the Netflix stream seemed too modernized and dark compared to the overall tone of the film. It almost ruined the film for me, as it distracted from some of the intended emotions of the film. If it had remained preserved accurately, things would have been better.

EFFECTS: The special effects were amazing for their time. Back in this time, the best effects one could achieve would be the result of impressive stage crafting, camera tricks, and good costume design. A Trip to the Moon achieved all of the above, with well-defined costume design and impressive camera tricks. From the iconic shot of the face in the moon to the alien encounters, this film was an effects marvel for its day. The classic effects still bring a very imaginative tone to the film, whether presented in black-and-white or retouched color.

OTHER CONTENT: Though this film is old, silent, and short, that in no way suggest that it's lackluster or insignificant. The guys in the film industry had this preserved for a reason, and that's because it's still an entertaining work of art and one hell-of-a-show to watch. If one just puts his or her mindset into that time, one would realize just how amazing and significant this film is to the industry. Thinking of how the performers put on this show as intricately as they did is the true whimsical fantasy, for this took a lot more hard work than some basic CGI today. Personally, I love the old-time feel this film has, with all of its camera flaws and different ways of achieving fantastic effects. It's 100% authentic. (Still don't agree? Watch Hugo.)

     A Trip to the Moon a. k. a. Le Voyage Dans la Lun is classic work of cinematic art, capturing the same wonder and fantasy today for different reasons. The film is well-preserved for the most part, excluding the addition or re-cut of the background music. Some people should leave aspects like that alone. Some things are better in their raw, cinematic state. Either way, this film marks a significant point in film history and still sheds honor upon these well-deceased performers.

Scooby-Doo (2002) review

(3/10)

     The live-action adaptation of Scooby-Doo is nothing short of wasted potential and pure annoyance. The all-star cast is let down by stereotypical script-writing and the fresh plotline is burdened by stale jokes and gags. Watching this as a child was always enjoyable, but, like most goofy movies from my childhood, it became less funny and more juvenile the more time passed. It still fills me with a bit of early-2000s nostalgia, but it fails superbly as a stand alone movie.

PLOT: Scooby-Doo and the gang have been solving mysteries for as long as they can remember. One day after solving an average mystery, the crew gets into an argument, causing Fred (Freddie Prinze, Jr.), Daphne (Sarah Michelle Gellar), and Velma (Linda Cardellini) to go off on their own. Shaggy (Matthew Lillard) and Scooby are left on their own with the Mystery Machine. Some time down the road, the gang is tracked down and coincidentally put on a flight to Spooky Island, a theme park with a dark mystery behind it. Those who visit Spooky Island come back as angry, near-mindless zombies, according to the eyewitness account of the island's owner, Mondavarious (Rowan Atkinson), and he invited the mystery gang to get to the bottom of it. However, this mystery isn't just hunting down some clever man in a mask. The monsters on this island are very real, weird, and threatening, testing the wits of the reunited mystery crew. The plot has a fairly unique twist compared to the previous Scooby-Doo animations as these monsters are real and not just men in masks. The mystery also messes with the timeline of Scooby-Doo in a way seemingly clever for the time. It has now, however, faded into annoyance. If not for the bland and juvenile jokes, the plot would have had potential. But I guess that's how one entertains children, right?

ACTING: The performances in this movie are really terrible for the most part. Each actor and actress plays their part to fit the character's stereotype so closely that its ridiculous. The only performance that showed the character any respect would be Matthew Lillard as Shaggy, as he matched his personality without annoyingly stereotyping him. Rowan Atkinson's role was an interesting one as it was a bit more tame and comprehensive than his previous performances in Mr. Bean and Black Adder. It was an interesting change, but definitely not significant enough to save the casts failures. The only other attempted saviors in the cast would be Isla Fisher as Mary Jane (for she wasn't too terrible) and the nostalgic cameo appearance of Sugar Ray.

SCORE/SOUNDTRACK: The soundtrack is mainly made up of early-2000s era rock and rap, like Sugar Ray, Simple Plan, Baha Men, Outkast, and (of course) Shaggy. It adds to the nostalgic feeling of the time period but compared to now just seems rather mediocre.

EFFECTS: The special effects in this movie are very dated and buggy compared to today's CGI standards, but for the time, these effects weren't too bad. The creative design of the monsters is the best effect of the movie, but due to the mediocre Scrappy Doo and the ghost protoplasms, that isn't enough to save the movie in this field. Most effects are very bland in appearance and cheap-looking, but the creatures get points for nostalgic, early-2000s creativity.

OTHER CONTENT: This adaptation of the classic show is still a childhood favorite of several late nineties kids and early millennials, but if one were to look at it outside of the calming nostalgia, one would notice that it's really terrible as a stand-alone movie. The jokes and gags become stale and juvenile, making the animated show look more clever and worth wasting time to watch. This movie did have a lot of potential as a children's film, for if it were done right, it could have become one of the more respectable children's films. However, the plot's potential was dashed aside for stereotypical leads and cheap jokes. The only things keeping this movie worth a watch is the nostalgia factor that some kids have tied to it, such as I to a minute extent.

     Live-action adaptations of children's shows don't always go down in film history. In fact, the majority of them completely miss the mark. Scooby-Doo is a surefire example of that. Plot is forgotten for cheap jokes and lazy leads. However, what would one expect in a film made to primarily please a bunch of eight-year-olds? The movie does have some nostalgia for the early millennials, but that's the only significance this movie holds. If not for that connection, Scooby-Doo would be remembered only as a classic cartoon.

A Nightmare On Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors (1987) review

(7/10)

   Indeed an improvement from its predecessor but not topping the first, A Nightmare On Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors revives the franchise from the death it was previously put in. Improved performances, cooler special effects, and an even balance between hilarity and terror earn this addition respect within the franchise.

PLOT: Once again on Elm Street, infamous nightmare serial killer, Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund), is terrorizing the teens that reside in the area. He tricks young, misunderstood teen, Kristen Parker (Patricia Arquette) into slitting her wrists resulting in her admission to the local youth  mental hospital. Within the institution, she meets several problematic teens with the same common problem as her: Freddy Krueger coming to kill in their dreams. The problem has hopes to be remedied, though, when older Nancy Thompson (Heather Langenkamp) becomes the secretary at the hospital and ways to help remedy the teens worries with their nightmares. However, Freddy seems to be getting more and more powerful as he takes the lives from the last of these Elm Street children. He gets harder to beat, and harder to try and conquer as the chief staff in the hospital disagree with Nancy and allied Dr. Neil Gordon's (Craig Wasson) methods in helping the tormented teenagers. The plot is very interesting and well executed. Putting Krueger in a mental hospital with a bunch of teenagers is similar to letting a hungry Rottweiler in a house full of cats. It's brutal and entertaining to watch, but expected. The many twists and turns of this plot, also, are very effective and very well done. The story is very much alive in this Nightmare.

ACTING: The performances in this Freddy film are very much improved than in its predecessor. Veteran actors Robert Englund and Heather Langenkamp reprise their roles as Freddy Krueger and Nancy Thompson with a certain chemistry. The two characters approach as age-old enemies though we feel these two have been each others age-old foil, for they both possess similar qualities but are very much the opposite. Langenkamp has even improved from the last one, establishing a character outside of the intense segments. The rest of the performances are excellently done, especially those of Patrica Arquette as Kristen, Ken Sagoes as haunted teen Kincaid, Jennifer Rubin as former junkie Taryn, Bradley Gregg as sleepwalking Phillip, Ira Heiden as paraplegic Will, Laurence Fishburne as orderly Max, and special appearances by John Saxon as Mr. Thompson and Zsa Zsa Gabor as herself. The cast here, though some are young, are very well played. Everyone plays their respective parts as though they had been that character their whole life.

SCORE: The score is very well done and as familiar as the first Freddy score. This soundtrack is different, however, with the addition of two songs ("Into the Fire", "Dream Warriors") by hair metal band Dokken. "Dream Warriors" lives to be a memorable track still, especially around this season.

EFFECTS: The special effects in this one are miles better than its predecessor. The effects are still used for a cheesy type of appeal, but this time they don't look as cheap or crudely made. From the Freddy-snake to Philip's puppet walk to each individual characters death scene (for those who do die), the effects are noticeably better but still used to get a kind of cheesy, B-movie effect.

OTHER CONTENT: The third Nightmare is miles better than its attempt at a predecessor. The story is thicker, along with the performances, and the balance of funny and scary is yet again in place. However, this one just feels funnier than the first, as the kills get increasingly more specific and ridiculous. However, this is not bad. We find ourselves laughing at Freddy, as if he were a clown performing for our entertainment. It is in this Nightmare movie where Freddy starts to feel like less of a serial killer and more of a stylish murderer. Freddy entertains and thrills, inspiring a few devious chuckles from the horror-loving audience it intends to please. Nightmare 3 is definitely a true horror at heart, however. Though Freddy comes out as funny, he still thrills us in this film, as we still think inside of how gruesome each way would be to die.

   Nightmare On Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors is definitely the revival of a long-lost franchise. Everything has improved tremendously, from the cast's performance to the special effects. The balance of scare and fun factor is successfully brought back, showing its fun face more often than it ever has. Freddy Krueger is an entertainer for his devoted audience, but a tremor for all of those who take his kills seriously. With a more developed story as well, this flick rises to an enjoyable Freddy feast.  

A Nightmare On Elm Street (1984) review

(9/10)

   The film that launched both Wes Craven's career and a major horror franchise is definitely no nightmare. A Nightmare On Elm Street remains to be one of the most classic horror films today, containing probably the most memorable horror film villain, an excellent cast, a distinct plot, and an entertaining mix of creepy imagery and cheesy kills. It feels much like going through a haunted fun-house, causing you to scream in terrifying enjoyment.

PLOT: Things start getting strange on Elm Street when the local teenagers start dreaming about a man named Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund), a burnt serial killer with knives on his hands who seems to be killing them in their sleep. One concerned teen in particular, Nancy Thompson (Heather Langenkamp), starts to notice and spread the word as quick as she can, to the disbelief of her parents but the undying support of her boyfriend, Glen Lantz (Johnny Depp) and framed "killer", Nick Corri (Jsu Garcia). Things start to get weirder as Nancy delves deeper into the mystery and finds out Freddy was a real local serial killer who used to murder children but was burnt to death in a not-so-accidental fire. Now, he's come back in teen's dreams to torture and kill once again in his humorous way. The plot was very unique and distinct for its time. The plot finds strength in its impressive storytelling and proper use of suspense, prompting just the right time for a jump scare, every time.

ACTING: The performances in this film are pretty excellent for a horror film of its kind. Heather Langenkamp seemed shaky at some points as the tormented Nancy, but during the most critical times of fear and intensity, she owned the role like no one else would ever be able to. Robert Englund established the part of serial killer, Freddy Krueger, almost as infamously as Krueger's crimes in Elm Street. The rest of the cast played their roles very well, including the career-launching performance from Johnny Depp as Nancy's love interest/best guy friend, Glen. The cast may not be perfect (excluding Englund), but I couldn't picture it any other way.

SCORE: Charles Bernstein creates a truly chilling yet simple theme for Krueger's character and many entrances, while adding plenty of emotion and paranoia to each moment of suspense leading up to the jumps. The score isn't as memorable as that of such horror gems like Halloween and The Exorcist, but it's still nevertheless chilling.

EFFECTS: The special effects in this film are pretty awesome and well done. The gruesome outcomes of Krueger's kills are created in such a way that it seems almost believable and not an obvious trick of technology, as these modern horror flicks seem to embrace. The blood is real and flows as true and plentiful as the Mississippi River, the make-up effects of Krueger seem authentic and very well done, and the many little scares along the way are enhanced by each effect used.

OTHER CONTENT: This horror film is one of the most memorable and even a classic in horror film history. However, don't take it too seriously. Nightmare is very authentically creepy and shocking in parts, but the many strange perks to Krueger's scares and methods almost seem darkly comical. The cheesiest of scares seems like a fun laugh, as of that in a haunted house attraction. This film is a very memorable and creepy one, but it's also a lot of fun for true horror fans everywhere. It doesn't create a very serious mood, like that of the two classics I've mentioned before, but it's definitely a more fun classic in the true horror canon.

  Wes Craven truly did strike gold with creating A Nightmare On Elm Street, establishing a horror franchise more memorable or infamous than any other you could name, including Friday the 13th or Halloween. An excellent cast, unique plot, very real-looking effects, fun-yet-creepy scares, and a truly memorable horror villain all lead this film's way into the hearts, memories, and of course, dreams, of horror fans all over.

Chappie (2015) review

(5/10)

   Chappie has great special effects, a surprising amount of charm, and a surreal approach to the editing and execution, but the acting is hit-and-miss, there's barely any character development, and the plot is both preposterous and way too familiar.

PLOT: Sometime in the near future in South Africa, a company named Tetravaal arises and invents a strong, robotic police force ideal for taking down crime rates and the gangster underground. One day, the inventor of the robotic police, Deon Wilson (Dave Patel), invents a sort of robotic consciousness that can give these robots feelings and the potential to be human. When he presents this idea to Tetravaal's leader (Sigourney Weaver), however, she shoots it down and disregards it altogether. Deon, being confident in his abilities, attempts to sneak out a badly damaged robot with intentions to fix it up and run his consciousness programming on it. In the process, however, Deon is ambushed by small group of thugs containing gangster, Ninja, his girlfriend, Yolandi (Yolandi Visser), and their foreign friend, Amerika (Jose Pablo Cantillo). These thugs capture Deon and his robot and force him to program the robot to fight for them in their gangster wars, though Deon's new consciousness program forces the robot to have to learn slowly, like a child. With only a few days battery left on the robot (whom they name Chappie), a major heist coming up, and a jealous coworker (Hugh Jackman) out to shut down Deon's project, tensions are high in teaching Chappie how to be both a gangster and a scientific marvel. The plot has great potential and is executed fairly well, but it has a couple fatal flaws that set it away from being truly great. For one, the plot is way too familiar. The ideas of robotic cops and street education have been overdone greatly and don't add anything too fresh to this movie. Also, the plot twists just end up making the plot itself so preposterous and unrealistic that it veers into very spacey territory. The plot had potential, but it just ended up being wasted.

ACTING: The performances in this movie weren't all really solid. The majority of the performances were truly hit-and-miss. Some actors were excellent in their roles while others made you question why they were chosen for their parts. The best performances came from Hugh Jackman as Vincent Moore, Dev Patel as Deon Wilson, and Sigourney Weaver as Michelle Bradley. The addition of veteran actors really helped this movie succeed performance-wise but only by a little. The rest of the performances were good in some parts and mediocre in others. It almost feels like the actors only acted right in the parts they wanted to. Sharlto Copley also did a pretty good job as the voice of Chappie.

SCORE: The score was pretty good, but the soundtrack was pretty horrible. The great Hanz Zimmer conducted the score for the movie, which was pretty fantastic in the dramatic and action-packed parts. The soundtrack, however, consisted mainly of mediocre-sounding rap and hip-hop songs, more than likely done by Ninja himself.

EFFECTS: The special effects were probably one of the best parts about the movie. The effects seemed fairly realistic at certain points in the movie. The robots looked nice and real for the most part and the explosions were pretty nice. If there was a big budget for this movie, it went mainly into the special effects and the big name casting.

OTHER CONTENT: This movie had two other prime factors that helped it succeed just a little more than it should have: its unexpected charm and its surreal editing. For a movie about robotic cops and gangsters, Chappie had a surprising amount of unexpected charm, from teaching Chappie how to be a human to seeing him become a true gangster. The charm inspires a lot of humor, which keeps the movie from truly sinking. Also, the editing in this movie made it seem so much more possible and surreal, like the beginning scenes where the robots were on CNN. However, with these great pros comes at least one more great con. This movie's character development, except for Chappie himself, was rather pathetic. From the start of the movie, we're just thrust headfirst into the main plot with possible main characters we're just supposed to be expected to know. The only true backstory we get is that of the robots themselves, and even that's minimal.

   Chappie wasn't a terrible movie, but it wasn't one of the greats either. The special effects, veteran actors, surprising charm, and surreal editing kept the movie from truly sinking, but the familiar and preposterous plot, hit-and-miss supporting cast, lack of character development, and terrible soundtrack kept it from becoming one of the greats. I would watch it again, but it's nowhere close to one of my favorites.

From Dusk Till Dawn (1996) review

(7/10)

   This half crime drama and half Grindhouse type horror movie proves that when two great minds come together, gold is made. With excellent performances by an all-star cast, campy special effects, hilarious dialogue, and intelligent plot execution, From Dusk Til Dawn makes its place as an instant classic in the horror world and in both Quentin Tarentino and Robert Rodriguez's fantastic film canon.

PLOT: Wanted bank robbers Seth Gecko (George Clooney) and Richard Gecko (Quentin Tarentino) have plans to travel into Mexico to flee the law and continue their lives without bother. To help on their journey across the border, the Gecko brothers take a vacationing family hostage, including faithless pastor, Jacob Fuller (Harvey Keitel) and his children, Kate (Juliette Lewis) and Scott (Ernest Liu). Once across the border, the unlikely posse stops at a shady bar and strip club open from dusk until dawn, known as the Titty Twister, whose main customers turn out to be more than expected. The customers turn out, unbelievably, to be vampires thrown into a frenzy by the scent of blood. Now the Gecko brothers, the Fuller family, and their new bar friends, Sex Machine (Tom Savini) and Frost (Fred Williamson), must fight their way through the night until the sun comes up at dawn. The plot is unique and very excellently executed. The switch from Tarentino's crime drama to Rodriguez's vampire flick is obvious, but fun to watch. The whole movie is a lot of fun and excellently thought out for the movie that it really is.

ACTING: The performances in this film are not only supplied by an all-star cast, but they are also excellently and professionally done. Clooney and Tarentino made a charismatic, professional acting team creating a presence of a stoic older brother and a loony younger brother as well as an epic criminal team. Harvey Keitel and Juliette Lewis also did a great job creating a very real family with issues to work out, as well as Ernest Liu in his first role. Everyone in this movie did a fantastic job of performing, from the leads to the supporting cast, including movie veterans Cheech Marin, Salma Hayek, Tom Savini, and Danny Trejo (who would later come to play Machete).

SCORE: The soundtrack and score in this movie was excellently crafted, signalling the many mood changes with rockin' artists. The soundtrack contains the music from rock greats, ZZ Top, Stevie Ray Vaughan, and The Blasters while also introducing the bar bad, Tito & Tarantula with excellent action score by Graeme Revell. The soundtrack is probably one of the best, among the ranks of Pulp Fiction and Dazed and Confused.

EFFECTS: The special effects in this movie are cheap but fun. The effects are made to be cheap and campy, bringing on a familiar Evil Dead-esque feel. They aren't professionally done, but they do their job in securing their type as a Rodriguez exploitation film.

OTHER CONTENT: This movie succeeds as both a crime drama and Grindhouse horror film. The two great directors, Quentin Tarentino and Robert Rodriguez, come together to make greatness. Almost as if they split the movie in half, you can tell when one man's vision ends and the other man's begins. Along with tall of the achievements this movie has scored for me, it also brings home excellent dialogue from sarcastic jokes to clever references. The movie is also affected by very professional direction and editing, bringing out the color in everything. This movie, to say the least, is a lot of fun to watch and a treat for horror fans. However, it wasn't made to be perfect. It's not a movie for everybody and it really isn't made to be taken seriously. I really like the movie, but it's not a milestone in cinema, just a treat for fans everywhere.

   From Dusk Till Dawn is a treat for Grindhouse and Tarentino fans everywhere, blending horror and drama together in an engaging, fun, campy movie experience with expert acting, an awesome soundtrack, and a pair of geniuses behind the wheel.

Jurassic World (2015) review

(8/10)

   This breath of fresh air to the once-dead franchise was a fun, surprise-filled trip into a modern look at the Jurassic Park premise. Skilled performances, killer special effects, thrilling fight scenes, and an overall feeling of nostalgia almost overrule the movie's slight predictability and uneven pace.

PLOT; Scientists have attempted to revive the dream of a living dinosaur park, as attempted many years in the past. Young dino-enthusiast Gray (Ty Simpkins) and older, unenthusiastic brother, Zach (Nick Robinson), are sent to this new park to spend some time with their Aunt Claire (Bryce Dallas Howard), who is a big boss over the park. Claire informs the supervisors of the park that they have genetically engineered a new dinosaur, crossbred between a T. Rex and a classified dinosaur. The new dino is terrifying, intelligent, and fierce. As expected in a Jurassic-themed movie, the dino breaks out and starts to wreak havoc on the park's staff and guests. It's up to the staff, including Claire and dino-trainer, Owen (Chris Pratt), to contain the situation and save the people and the park, but twists and turns are around each corner. The plot contains the same beloved premise as the rest of the Jurassic movies, but adds some fresh, thrilling cliches and styles to help modernize the franchise. Though exciting, some parts of the movie seem utterly predictable. Though still fun, these cliches run the movie straight into summer blockbuster-popcorn thriller territory.

ACTING: The performances in this movie are pretty great. Though the characters themselves are of a stereotypical type, the performers themselves are excellent at what they do. The best performances in this movie would have to be from Chris Pratt as raptor-trainer Owen, Bryce Dallas Howard as Aunt Claire, Omar Sy as raptor-assistant Barry, Vincent D'Onofrio as conniving Vic Hoskins, and Irrfan Khan as big boss Simon Masrani. All performances, even the extras, were pretty well done, but these few stood out in securing their roles. 

SCORE: The musical score to Jurassic World is pretty epic and nostalgic, bringing back the traditional Jurassic Park theme music and adding some intense action music to the thrilling fight scenes. The great Michael Giacchino steps up to compose the music for this movie, and as usual, he does a fine job of the sort.

EFFECTS: The special effects in this movie were fantastic. The CG dinosaurs in this movie looked awesome and very close to real in detail. From the T. Rex to the raptors all the way to the water dino and the new dino, every one looked awesome. Even the aftermath of the fights and attacks looked amazing thanks to the modern effects.

OTHER CONTENT: This is probably going to be one of the best summer blockbusters of the year. Aside from the previously-mentioned pros, the movie contained thrilling scenes of high-energy dinosaur fights, twists and turns around every corner, and an overall feeling of nostalgia for the fans of the beloved franchise. The fight scenes had me on the edge of my seat, as well as all of the unexpected twists. This movie sparked a bit of nostalgia for myself by referring to the previous films in all the right places. However, the movie had a couple of minor flaws that deterred my viewing experience, such as the predictability in some scenes I mentioned earlier and the uneven pace. One minute, everything's moving in fast, high-energy fashion, while the next, it's dragging out every little step or precaution taken. It's not a major problem, but it is noticeable. The movie, overall, was pretty great, but still a standard Hollywood blockbuster.

   This movie was still really great to see. The acting, plot execution, effects, feelings of nostalgia, and high-energy action scenes definitely drew me in, but the movie is still just your standard Hollywood blockbuster, with some predictability and an uneven pacing. Recommended!

Labyrinth (1986) review

(8/10)

   Jim Henson has impressed the mass family audience throughout the years with his many fantasy films and comedic variety, from The Dark Crystal to The Muppets. This movie is no exception; in fact, it meets in between fantasy and comedy. Since my childhood, this movie has kept me enthralled and coming back to visit the fantastic, creative world of the Labyrinth again and again, with excellent puppetry by Henson's crew, great soundtrack from the rockin' voice of David Bowie, and a whimsical sense of child-like fantasy that lets you know that you've been whisked away to another world. However, all good things age and get old after a while.

PLOT: Young Sarah (Jennifer Connelly) is stuck in a rut with her family and obsessed with her favorite book, Labyrinth, about a wicked goblin king and his kingdom. One night when her parents leave her in the care of her baby brother, who won't stop crying for anything, she wishes that the goblins from her story will come take him away to their land forever. To her surprising dismay, her wish comes true and the evil goblin king, Jareth (David Bowie), and his army of goblins come to take her brother away. Now, she must navigate her way through the labyrinth that is the goblin kingdom, facing each new turn, situation, and creature with an open mind, especially her new "friend", Hoggle (Brian Henson), who's cowardly and grumpy, but knows the labyrinth better than anyone else she comes into contact with. The plot is very unique and whimsical, considering the main character is whisked away to the land in her favorite book. The execution is marvelous, taking the land of the labyrinth and adding more and more visually stunning characters and ridiculous situations. With all that's going on in this movie, there's no surprise that this is a classic fantasy film.



ACTING/VOICES: The acting in this film is very good. The stars of the show would definitely have to be Jennifer Connelly and David Bowie as Sarah and Jareth. Though Connelly's part as Sarah seems rather over-dramatic and amateurish, she seems to actually pull off the character that Sarah's supposed to be, and rather well: a book-obsessive, young teenager stuck in a rut and her own fantasy world. Bowie just plays the part as the wicked goblin king with ease and finesse, putting a wicked power in his hands only a professional could control. The voices for the puppet-characters are also very fitting: cartoonish and Henson-like. The best voices had to be from Brian Henson as Hoggle, Dave Goelz as Didymus, The Hat, the Four Guards, and the Left Door Knocker, David Healy as the Right Door Knocker, and Michael Hordern as the Wise Man. Henson and Goelz definitely were the best of the bunch, as they shed the true spirit of puppet voices. They were definitely fun and fitting.

SCORE: The score was very well done by Trevor Jones, a master of eighties synth and sound. The score gave the film more of a sound of wonder and whim. The soundtrack from rock master, David Bowie, was also very pleasant, with memorable, catchy songs, such as "Magic Dance" and "Chilly Down" and more in depth songs like "Underground" and "As the World Falls Down". Bowie's addition to the score definitely enhances the fact that this is a classic for fantasy fans and cult followers everywhere.

EFFECTS: The effects in this movie are excellent. Jim Henson's puppetry has been loved long before this for its cartoon joy, but in here, Henson's crew really shows what creativity can do with creating dozens of colorful characters, from an old man with a bird hat to red-haired monsters with removable limbs to four guards hidden behind a shield except for their heads. The creativity of the characters is definitely the best part of the movie, as well as the building of the sets for location. The labyrinth itself looks very well done and more realistic than a lot of CGI work done on films these days.



MISC. THOUGHTS: The movie itself is a trip into a completely-different world, not seen before by audiences around this time. So much is going on that you actually could be convinced that this movie could live and breathe with its own community. Simply put, this movie has been brought to life by its many perks of which Henson has installed. This was a childhood favorite of mine, and still rings true today as a classic in my book. However, growing older has revealed to me a couple of things about this movie. Firstly, the humor can span from slapstickish to potty humor to just family friendly jokes, and some of those jokes just end up growing old in the end, from the overall fear of "The Eternal Stench" to the goofball actions of the Fireys. The movie has a lot for everyone, but only at certain times for certain audiences, even more distinct than films today with references and wide spans of humor. Secondly, the tone in this movie tends to shift greatly sometimes, without warning. One minute you could be plunging into action, and the next you can be slowing down to an almost direct halt. A couple parts in particular would be the launching of Sarah into the labyrinth (fast, wastes no time) and the hallucinogenic dream from the apple's bite (slows the movie down greatly). The tone shifts sometimes seem effective, but not all the time.

   The Henson, fantasy classic definitely meets in the middle of dark and humorous, with wild fantasy and family humor laden throughout. The execution breathes life into the world Henson created, the acting puts Jennifer Connelly on the map and secures David Bowie's glam stardom, the score and soundtrack add memorable eighties sounds and music to the decade, and the whimsical feeling of fantasy drags the watcher away into a infinite world of possibility. However, the movie's humor becomes less relevant with age and the tone shifts become more noticeable.

The Avengers (2012) review

(9/10)

   The superhero movie the masses had been waiting for arrived with full-force action, intelligent and humorous dialogue, top-notch acting, and a unity of amazing superhero power. From Hulk to Captain America, the movie builds a steady character and chemistry among the characters while keeping the viewers on the edge of their seats. However, if you aren't a close Marvel fan or follower, you might just be more than lost.

PLOT: Trouble begins brewing at S.H.I.E.L.D. when the Tesseract, a source of unlimited sustainable energy, is stolen by the Norse god, Loki (Tom Hiddleston). From here on, it's a war and a race between S.H.E.I.L.D. and Loki's army to keep the Tesseract and restore each own's perceptions of peace. Agent Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) has only one idea in mind: to build the best army yet to capture it back. To do so, Fury gathers all the best strength and wits from around the globe, including superspy Black Widow (Scarlett Johannsson), brilliant scientist Bruce Banner a.k.a. the Incredible Hulk (Mark Ruffalo), billionaire playboy Tony Stark a.k.a. Iron Man (Robert Downey, Jr.), ancient war hero Captain Amerca (Chris Evans), Norse god Thor (Chris Hemsworth), and pinpoint archer Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner). These few must band up to create the powerful team known only as The Avengers to save the world, put a stop to Loki's army, and capture back the Tesseract. The plot is very basic in form but is executed brilliantly. High-energy action, intense martial arts, exciting twists, and superhero chemistry set the execution in line to make a movie as brave and bold as the heroes in this movie seem to be.



ACTING: The performances in this movie are excellently done. The heroes play their parts with emotional excellence and familiarity that makes you think they lived as that character their whole lives. The best of the superhero performances had to be from Robert Downey, Jr., Mark Ruffalo, Chris Evans, and Scarlett Johansson as Tony Stark/Iron Man, Bruce Banner/Hulk, Captain America, and Black Widow. These performances were excellently done, putting personality into each role and making it a reality stronger than the pulp they were born from. I'm not saying, however, that the other heroes did bad; they were just as good overall. I just felt the roles mentioned earlier were the best played of them all. Tom Hiddleston also played an excellent part as the movie's central villian, Loki. I felt like he was the Joker of this hero movie, which means that he put more twisted style into the part than seen before. I was very entertained by Hiddleston's elegant yet disturbed Loki.

SCORE: The score in this movie was bold, intense, and very well done by Alan Silvestri. The intense score brought the non-stop action more life and honor than expected normally.

EFFECTS: The visual effects in this movie were excellently done as well. Explosions, alien army craft, intense fight scenes, and the Hulk transformations were all fantastically done by the visual effects team. They made everything seem more real and textured, as if you could feel Hulk's skin or Iron Man's metal suit. I was definitely impressed with how things were done.



MISC. THOUGHTS: The movie is a fun ride of action and superhero movie glory, adding in intelligent moments of humorous one-liners, dialogue seemingly written by the scientists in the movie themselves, and impressive scenes of fantastic battles. However, you're not going to be following the story very well if you haven't seen the Marvel movies to date, or if you aren't even a Marvel fan. The whole movie itself is a nodding treat to Marvel fans everywhere, which is evident in the making and execution, where the character backstories are assumed and the references of the heroes power strengths and limitations are inserted. The movie is an amazing piece in action/superhero cinema, but as a stand-alone film in story and development, it's not for everyone.

   Marvel heroes have never looked as cool and clean as they have now, popping off of the pulp comic they came from before. The nonstop action and overlapping humor add personality to the performances of the classic heroes and convincing villain. The modern re-vamp has avenged the hearts of Marvel fans all over, but it won't successfully accomplish the same for those new to the franchise.

Altered States (1980) review

(9/10)

   This film is basically a body horror with the brains of a college professor. The complexity of this horror film and its many details make it a trip worth taking. The performances are amazing, the effects are mind-blowing for the time, and the overall horror feeling it gives is awesome. This isn't just a horror for the masses, however. The amount of intelligence put into this is almost incomprehensible unless you pay attention to all the details.

PLOT: Dr. Eddie Jessup (William Hurt), a Harvard research scientist, believes there are other states of consciousness as real as reality itself. Through sensory deprivation brought on by an isolation tank, Dr. Jessup explores these altered states while also taking untested hallucinogenic drugs that he discovered overseas, to the disdain of his wife, Emily (Blair Brown) and fellow colleague, Dr. Mason (Charles Haid). However, he does gain the support of his other colleague, Dr. Rosenberg (Bob Balaban). Jessup sees an early species of man among other curious images, but it starts to harm him. After a few of these experiments, Jessup's body starts to transform with him to form that of the early species of man he saw. What ensues after too many experiments is madness unchained. The plot is very well thought-out with brilliant execution. The way the plot is set up leaves it open for many artistic shots, which the director definitely takes advantage of. You will feel truly as if you're on the trips with Jessup as the film progresses.



ACTING: The performances in this film amazed me. I was very impressed with the acting skills of these performers. William Hurt played a very memorable part as the over-curious Dr. Jessup. His speeches describing what he's seen make you think he's an expert at what he does. For his film debut, I think he did really well. My favorite performances, however, were Charles Haid and Bob Balaban as Mason and Rosenberg. There back-and-forth insults and conversations with each other were just excellently done with great emotion and shocking realism. Blair Brown also did very well as Emily Jessup, though she didn't have as big of a part.

SCORE: The score in this film was actually very nice. There were definitely some memorable, freaky themes that accompanied some of the more suspenseful and disturbing parts. The same could be said for the parts with more action and jump.

EFFECTS: The visual effects in this film were just marvelous, especially for their time. I don't think I can express enough words to even state how much these surprised and blew me away. From the last time Jessup enters the isolation tank to his forced exit from it, the effects are overloaded, stacked, enhanced, and excellent, showing his body change and the whole area around him light up to mimic his hallucinations. Even the surprise climax at the end of the film was just mind-blowing. The make-up effects were very authentic to for the Indians and the early human. The effects in this film hands-down made it memorable.



MISC. THOUGHTS: The film, along with its effects and performances, was just brilliant. Even with the possibilities of any of this even happening being preposterous, the film still succeeds to amaze me and entertain the cinephile in me. The film was amazingly intelligent with how it went about accomplishing this, from script to execution. However, that's what separates the audiences of this film. This film feels just a bit too smart for the general public; it makes you feel like you have to be intelligent to be able to follow it. Sadly, not everyone likes or can comprehend films like this to their full extent, so it's definitely not for everybody, though the effects could probably shock or surprise them as well as they did I. There also seemed to be a great amount of symbolism in the film that I thought was a nice treat for those who could notice it.

   The film is excellent, intelligent, well executed, and amazingly performed with mind-boggling effects and memorable score. I'll probably be talking about this film for days to come as a horror buff and a cinephile. However, this isn't everyone's cup of tea. One might need to educate themselves just a little bit before watching this horror/sci-fi marvel.

Evil Dead 2 (1987) review

(9/10)

   Watching this film is literally the equivalent of walking into a carnival funhouse. The scares, many perks and execution of the film itself just ensue hilarity, and overall feeling of glorious camp, and a good spirit for the world of horror film. From the performances to the amazing yet cheap effects, this film will sit you down, crack you up, and quite possibly even scare you, but not too much. Unlike it's predecessor, it's not meant to be as serious. 

PLOT: Ash (Bruce Campbell) and his girlfriend, Linda (Denise Bixler) decide to take a trip to an abandoned cabin in the woods to spend some time together. However, things start getting strange when Ash discovers a recorded message reading off details of a race of demons and performing an indication to summon them. Soon after, Linda gets possessed by one of these demons and Ash must kill her off and stay the night in the cabin alone, for the one road out has been destroyed by the evil. Meanwhile, Annie Knowby (Sarah Berry), the daughter of the voice on the message, has found certain pages of the involved book: the Book of the Dead, and plans to bring them back to the cabin to research and preserve. Up until the point Annie and her party meet with Ash, and even past that point, chaos ensues in and around the cabin, from possessed corpses roaming around to laughing furniture and even to a possessed hand. The plot is excellently executed, with the execution mixing it up anyway it can be. If predictability would be your worry while watching this film, I can guarantee it won't be a problem. This film's plot execution goes in so many different directions that you would swear it's a staged show of a sort. The plot in itself is pretty nice for a horror film: a young couple having to fight demons in a cabin in the woods. It might be a bit general, but it's definitely interesting. 

ACTING: The performances in this film were all done very well, with Bruce Campbell being treated as the shining star as Ash. Campbell's performance in this film is known as one of the most iconic in the history of horror film-making. From a highly-quotable script to key scenes emphasizing the emotion of insanity and pure exhaustion in Ash's character, Campbell definitely cleans house with a truly campy performance of a new horror icon. Aside from Campbell, the other performances were also very well cast. Denise Bixler , Sarah Berry, Kassie DePaiva, and Dan Hicks all fit their parts well as the sultry Linda, the wise Annie, the roughneck Bobby Joe, and the redneck Jake. Their performances would have probably been a little different had they not been cast just right for the character they were willing to play. 

SCORE: The score in this film is very well done, but nothing too special. It enhances the drama, horror, and intensity of the moments, but it doesn't introduce any truly memorable themes to the horror world. 

EFFECTS: The special effects in this film are very well done. To get the special effects just right, director Sam Raimi went from having make-up effects, to digital effects, and even to claymation effects, just to have the mood and image just how he wanted it. The make-up effects are definitely well-thought out but full of camp. Some pretty freaky-looking monsters are introduced throughout the movie, from a deadite Frankenstein to a large, madman of a creature. The digital effects were very cool and enhancing to the film, such as the clouds clearing out of a possessed one's eyes. The claymation effects had to have been my favorite variety of effects Raimi used. The creepy style of the effects and also the camp mood they gave off made the film ten times better than some would believe it to be. 

MISC. THOUGHTS: This film is like a horror film funhouse in several ways: you never know what's going to happen next and it's always going to make you laugh. This film is a creative trip through horror camp that's meant to be fun and unpredictable as well as memorable, which it is without a doubt. However, the sequel's added length of humor takes away a key aspect that its predecessor, Raimi's original Evil Dead, had. The original Evil Dead actually had the potential to be scary. The way it was shot and how vague it was in how it was meant to be taken seriously or not gave the original an accidental potential to actually be frightening. This sequel doesn't have near as many opportunities to come off as scary as its predecessor had. This, however, is the only flaw in this film filled with B-movie camp and glorification. 

   The sequel to Raimi's original horror classic holds up, with fun situations to watch around every corner and an awesomely-played lead to crack the audience up, as well as amazing, lower-budget effects to enhance the film's mood. The film is full of camp and B-movie glory, much like its predecessor, but it doesn't have the potential to be truly scary, as its older sibling had.  

MirrorMask (2005) review

(7/10)

The movie may be a fall from Jim Henson's original works, but it's definitely a visionary piece of effect art with an interesting plot and decent scripting.

PLOT:Helena (Stephanie Leonidas) is in a circus troupe with her father (Rob Brydon) and mother (Gina McKee). She's never liked being confined strictly to the circus and always wanted to get out in the real world and live for herself. To deal with her pain, she draws out her feelings in creative styles, covering her walls in her bedroom. One night, Helena's mother has an episode and passes out, putting her in the hospital for immediate surgery. Helena blames herself for her mother's illness and falls asleep the night of her surgery with stress on her mind. When Helena wakes up, she finds herself in a dream world made up entirely of the drawings she has hung on her wall. While there, she discovers strange creatures and meets new people, who all wear masks as a normal tradition. Helena befriends a juggler named Valentine (Jason Berry) and learns that she has switched lives with the Princess of Dark in that land. The Princess had stolen the charm that put the Princess of Light to an endless sleep, which is referred to as the MirrorMask. Helena must restore the normality in this dream world while still trying to get back to her own world and stopping the Princess from ruining her life. It's a great plot executed very well. There's a few minor holes and problems with the fabric and basis of the plot, which I'll discuss later.



ACTING:The performances in this movie were fairly good. Stephanie Leonidas played a decent part as Helena and the princess, Anti-Helena, but didn't truly shine out. She didn't impress me too much. The performances I really enjoyed were Rob Brydon as Helena's father and the prime minister of the dream world; Gina McKee as Helena's mother, the Queen of Light, and the Queen of Dark; and Jason Berry as Valentine. These performances weren't excellently done, but I enjoyed the way they were played, especially Jason Berry's part. He added personality to the part of Valentine, the juggler and "very important man" of the dream world. The rest of the minor parts were decent but nothing that absolutely blew me away. The acting in here is just fair: nothing extremely spectacular.

SCORE:The score in here was decent. The themes were cool sounding but not extremely memorable. The most memorable part in the soundtrack would have to be the cover of "(They Long to Be) Close to You", which is haunting and very well organized.

EFFECTS:The effects in here is what sells the movie as a unique artwork. The effects in here are from the mind of the great mind of Jim Henson and his crew. The effects combine Henson-style costume design with CG animation and the result is mind-bending and rather freaky. I like the effects, but I believe they haven't aged as well compared to the effects used in today's film industry. The effects were really good and nice for their time, but they just don't hold up now as Henson's traditional puppet fare does today.



OTHER CONTENT:Neil Gaiman, writer of several books and TV episodes (including episodes of Doctor Who and Coraline), collaborated on writing for this movie. The plot itself is very interesting, while all the while deriving from the right places (The Wizard of Oz, Labyrinth, etc.), but I found a few holes such as: What happened to the Princess in the end? Did this even happen or was it just a pointless dream? Many other questions arise in my head as I think about this movie's outcome and execution. Also, the script had moments I both loved and hated, including clever riddles and dialogue among pointless gags and cheesy conversations. There were points in the movie overall I loved and hated. However, the movie did entertain and did wow me with its effects and vision, as ancient as they seem now.

OVERALL,it's a good movie with an interesting plot, fair performances, decent score, and unique effects. However, the effects didn't age as well as Henson's other fare, several plot holes arise, and the movie/dialogue's likability fluctuated with me.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 2 (2011) review

(10/10)

This conclusion to the Harry Potter franchise is powerful in performance, emotion, action, and story all together. Director Yates definitely knew where he was going in making this film that concludes a franchise of a childhood.

PLOT:After Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes) finds the Elder Wand, Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) and his friends continue to the best of their abilities to find and destroy the remaining Horcruxes before Voldemort and his army build up and destroy Hogwarts, where the three head next. A war of epic proportions is about to start between Voldemort and Harry and their many followers, but Harry might find that the only way to win it is through a tragic sacrifice. It's an excellent plot executed brilliantly.



ACTING:The performances in this film are excellent as well. Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, and Emma Watson shine brightly in acting their last performances as Harry, Ron, and Hermione. The emotion they put into the roles this time feels real, more real than its predecessor's have been able to accomplish, except maybe in its latter additions. Every performance in this film was excellent; there was no bad acting that I could spot. The best performers in this film would be Ralph Fiennes as Voldemort, Alan Rickman as Snape, Tom Felton as Draco, Helena Bonham Carter as Bellatrix, Maggie Smith as Prof. McGonagall, Michael Gambon as Dumbledore, Matthew Lewis as Neville, and James and Oliver Phelps as Fred and George Weasley. These few really tied the whole film together.

SCORE:The score in this film is beautifully done with intense and gentle themes by the great Alexandre Desplat. Desplat really knows where to go in conducting scores for these kind of films.

EFFECTS:The effects in this one were very well done and detailed. There was so much creature and magical action from the army of stone soldiers, to the many spells cast by each wizard, and even to the snake attacks. The effects in this one were really action-focused and worked very well.



OTHER CONTENT:This Harry Potter film had to have the best balance between action, emotion, and story that actually works. The emotional backstories of certain characters revealed in here really hit home among audiences. I believe this addition was truly made as a conclusion more than an individual film, but it ended right with a bang and a nod to nostalgia of the generation that grew up with this franchise. Everything in this film just falls brilliantly together to form an ending worthwhile.

OVERALL,an epic Harry Potter film with a brilliant plot, excellent performances, beautiful Desplat score, very well focused effects, a great balance between action, emotion, and story, great emotion in backstories, and a fine conclusion to a childhood franchise of mine.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 1 (2010) review

(8/10)

This first addition to the Harry Potter conclusion is a very deep character study with impressive direction and brilliant performances by the leads. However, the film picks up a little slower than the rest in certain parts.

PLOT:Harry (Daniel Radcliffe), Ron (Rupert Grint), and Hermione (Emma Watson) are not returning to Hogwarts this year with intent on finding the remaining Horcruxes, or parts of Voldemort's soul stored in an item, and destroying them. However, finding these objects aren't easy, especially when they possess life-changing dark power. Also, Hermione notices a strange symbol in every place they end up that might be connected to finding the Horcruxes and the mysterious Deathly Hallows. It's a great plot executed excellently.



ACTING:The performances in this film are brilliant, especially by the main three. Radcliffe, Grint, and Watson really outshine their classic roles of Harry, Ron, and Hermione with more emotional character interaction than ever before. We see some of the true personalities of the characters flow more outward in this film. The other performances in this film were just as brilliant as well. The other shining performances that really kept me entertained and complimented the film well were Helena Bonham Carter as Bellatrix, Ralph Fiennes as Voldemort, Bonnie Wright as Ginny Weasley, Alan Rickman as Snape, Rhys Ifans as Xenophilius Lovegood, Timothy Spall as Peter Pettigrew, Brendan Gleeson as Mad-Eye Moody, and Toby Jones as Dobby. All performances were good as usual, but these were my favorites of this film aside from the main three.

SCORE:The score in this film was very intense and beautiful composed by the great Alexandre Desplat. I believe every theme is loads darker and more beautiful in this one. Desplat has great skill in this film.

EFFECTS:The effects in this one weren't as broad as the others have been, but they were still pretty cool. I enjoyed the snakes, wand battles, and Disapparations. The wand battles were really great I'd say.



OTHER CONTENT:This film was under the fine direction of David Yates and seems even more finely-tuned than its predecessor by Yates. This film, in reality, is a slow-boiling character study of the main three with a added mystery of the Horcruxes and Deathly Hallows. The chemistry of the characters in this one is really well shared and emotional altogether. However, I believe this one is a bit slower in the middle than its predecessors have been. The middle consists more of character study and mystery than of action or eventful twists. It almost seems like a shock when the end comes with so much eventful action. The slow parts aren't unecessary, but they're not to overlap the action. Overall however, this film is pretty great and a good prelude to the final chapter of the Harry Potter films.

OVERALL,a great Harry Potter film with an excellent plot, brilliant performances, beautiful score by Desplat, cool effects, fine direction, and an intriguing character study, but this film doesn't pick up as fast as its predecessors have and it seems a bit too reliant on its next part.

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (2009) review

(9/10)

This Harry Potter film was made under fine direction with outstanding performances, excellent execution, and an even balance, but does it have as much spice as its predecessors' had?

PLOT:Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe) returns to Hogwarts this year with knowledge that Voldemort and his followers are going to strike the school soon, as they've already started making disturbances in the Muggle world. Dumbledore (Michael Gambon) acknowledges this fact and hires one of the best colleagues, Horace Slugworth (Jim Broadbent), at school to take over the Potions program and watch out for these things, pushing Snape (Alan Rickman) up finally to Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher. Throughout all of Voldemort's evil and the new suspicion that Draco (Tom Felton) is soon to be a Death Eater, the teens still seem to find a time to work on love and relationships, especially Ron (Rupert Grint) and Hermione (Emma Watson). Also, secrets seem to uncover that could lead to the final defeat of Voldemort. It's a great plot executed excellently.



ACTING:The performances in this film are outstanding. Every performance in this film is top-notch. There are so many good ones that I'm afraid I can't mention them all. Radcliffe, Grint, and Watson all played their stellar recurring roles as Harry, Ron, and Hermione, acting with even more human emotion than I've seen in a while. The best, shining performances in this film would be Michael Gambon as Dumbledore, Tom Felton as Draco Malfoy, Jim Broadbent as Horace Slughorn, Alan Rickman as Snape, Helena Bonham Carter as Bellatrix, Bonnie Wright as Ginny Weasley, and Robbie Coltrane as Hagrid. These few really showed a shining performance of emotion that convinced me and stood out from the rest. All the performances in this film are really excellent.

SCORE:The score in this one is very well done with touching themes and beautiful sound by Nicholas Hooper yet again.

EFFECTS:The effects in this Harry Potter film are actually even better, mainly near the end. In the ending scene, the effects are way more astounding than I expected to have seen. Overall, the effects in this one were really cool.



OTHER CONTENT:This Harry Potter film was done just really well. The direction by David Yates stood unique and visionary, the performances stood as outstanding, and even the jokes stood as fairly mature. The only "flaw" I saw in this one was that the plot wasn't as cleverly thought out as the others have been until near the very end. Most of the film is focused on relationships, Slughorn's secret, and Draco's secret until the very end with less twists as compared to a couple of previous additions to the canon. Don't get me wrong; the plot and its ending were amazing and executed brilliantly by the actors. I just thought this one to be a bit more "closed" than some of its predecessors' have been. Overall though, this is a very well made film.

OVERALL,an awesome Harry Potter film with an excellent plot, outstanding performances, touching score, cool effects, visionary direction, and fairly mature laughs, but the plot wasn't as broad as some of its predecessors' have been.

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005) review

(10/10)

This Harry Potter film may be halfway through the series, but it's only the beginning of the inner story. This film is where everything from the plot to the performances and on start maturing drastically, and frankly, I could not look away.

PLOT:It's Harry's (Daniel Radcliffe) fourth year at Hogwarts and things are already going bad. After a nasty attack by the Death Eaters, which are Voldemort's followers, at the Quidditch World Cup, talk about the dark lord coming back is among the teachers. However, things have to stay positive, for Hogwarts is hosting two other wizarding schools for the Triwizard Tournament, which is a dangerous three tasks which only one student from each school 17 or over can be in. The three from each school are picked, but then the goblet spits out a fourth name, which turns out to be Harry's. By this strange turn of events, Harry is the fourth and youngest participant in this years Triwizard Tournament. However, Harry didn't even want to be entered in the tournament. Could this strange coincidence be linked with the Death Eaters, Harry's frightful dreams, and this year's new Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher, the dark wizard-hunter, Mad-Eye Moody (Brendan Gleeson)? I'll leave you there. It's a great plot executed brilliantly.



ACTING:The performances in here are excellent and greatly matured overall. This is where I can truly call the youth actors' performances adult, or at least comprehensible enough to be out of the "child-actor" stereotype. Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson, and even Tom Felton have greatly matured in their roles as Harry Potter, Ron Weasley, Hermione Granger, and Draco Malfoy. The other performances I found really convincing and emotional would have to be Michael Gambon as Dumbledore, Alan Rickman as Severus Snape, Brendan Gleeson as Moody, Ralph Fiennes as Lord Voldemort, David Tennant as Barty Crouch Jr., and Robbie Coltrane as Hagrid. These performances, especially with the introduction of Fiennes and Tennant, were very excellent and convincing as well as entertaining. There wasn't a terrible performance in the bunch this time. The other performances I would consider honorable mentions would be Robert Pattinson as Cedric Diggory, Gary Oldman as Sirius Black, and Jason Isaacs as Lucius Malfoy.

SCORE:The score in this one was more intense and beautiful than it had been in the past Harry Potter films, composed this time by the great Patrick Doyle. I really liked the themes put into this one; they fit the mood and could stand alone nearly as well.

EFFECTS:The effects in this film are even better than in the last. They add some even cooler effects, from the merpeople to Voldemort himself reforming, and even the dark mark. The effects seem a bit more detailed than they have in the past few films.



OTHER CONTENT:This Harry Potter film was one that I could not look away from. The story was so compelling that I was kept glued to the screen the whole time. The performances, twists, and all kept me watching thoroughly to the very end. This is where we start to learn about Voldemort's true history and power, so in a sense, this is only the beginning. I believe this addition to the series is the beginning of the mature Harry Potter, but still with some teenage perks (like great interest in the opposite sex and a laid-back attitude).

OVERALL,an epic Harry Potter film with a great plot, excellent and mature performances, intense and beautiful score, more detailed effects, a compelling and new story, and an introduction to the young adult Harry Potter.