[DVD]
Just don’t bother. I’m a Statham fanboy, but this is probably worse than The Transporter 2 [Blu-ray | DVD], Transporter 3, and War [Blu-ray | DVD] combined.
Movie review: Chaos
Leave a reply
Author Archives: seoulfully
Movie review: Cloverfield
So I watched Cloverfield way back when, but wanted to see it on blu-ray so hit up the Netflix to watch it again in HD. I wasn’t particularly fond of this movie the first time I saw it. I mean to say, I didn’t particularly care about this movie the first time I saw it. I can’t say a second viewing, HD or not, has changed my mind on it.
I think Cloverfield is commendable in the same way M. Night Shyamalan’s Signs [Blu-ray | DVD] was commendable. But it also suffers the same major problem. Both of the movies were so scary dealing with the unknown. Signs was particularly effective with it. Cloverfield did as much as it could with the concept given that it was a godzilla flick. But the point is, and this has been much covered before me, the less I actually saw of the monsters in the respective movies, the scarier they were. I was unbelievably disappointed when I saw the alien in Signs. And I certainly was disappointed when I saw the full monster in Cloverfield, as well as the little bugs.
I know there is no way to go without showing either. If they hadn’t been shown there would’ve been huge outcry. “The largest macguffin ever!” “What kind of monster movies doesn’t show the monster?!” But I really feel seeing both really took away from the suspense and fear the movies built up. J.J. Abrams produced Cloverfield. And I really wish he had pushed Matt Reeves, the director, to take a pseudo-Mission: Impossible III [Blu-ray | DVD] tactic. In that movie, J.J. Abrams had Ethan Hunt chase down “The Rabbit’s Foot.” In the movie, it’s is the macguffin. But it is never explained. What it is, what it does, why we should be worried it’s in terrorists’ hands. Nothing. But who cares. That it is there is the reason for worry. Do we really need to know all the minute details?
I think this would’ve worked great in Signs or Cloverfield. We know NYC is being ravaged by some huge monster (by the way, I really disliked the seeming from nowhere insect monsters, there had to be a better way to introduce other scary things than that idea). Do we really want to see it? Do we really NEED to see it?
Last legs
Last legs, originally uploaded by seoulfully.
Credits: Zero 7 – Waiting to Die
Movie review: The Edge of Heaven
[DVD]
This movie might’ve been good. I have no idea. I had it on the full running time, but it didn’t interest me enough to watch carefully. I suppose that’s an indication of what I thought of the movie as well.
Movie review: Rocky Balboa
Okay, so I wrote tangentially about this movie way back when in the context of race. So here’s my review after actually having finally seen the movie. It’s classic Rocky. It’s not a bad movie. Buy only in as much as it apes EVERY SINGLE good boxing movie ever made. That’s all there is to it. From Raging Bull [Blu-ray | DVD] to Ali [DVD] to all of the previous Rockys [DVD], it’s all in there. So it’s good because it takes all the best parts, but bad because it’s just derivative? It definitely made me nostalgic for my youth and watching the Rocky series. I can also say, after 6 movies, nobody, and I mean NOBODY, does a better training montage piece than the Rocky series.
Movie review: The Fall
I can’t say I was a fan. This movie was certainly a visual spectacle. And that covers a WHOLE lot of ground for me. I can deal with a lot of bad just to watch a movie that looks good (see e.g. Michael Bay movies). But that said, I can’t say that this movie really accomplished that for me. I mean it is a visual movie. And colorful. And all of that. And most definitely had some amazing vistas and locations. But it was kind of mostly about costume and color. And I don’t think that those two things were used as artistically as they were in “Hero”.
I guess I was just bored by the dynamic of the two central characters. Even at the end, when it took a slightly more melodramatic turn, I just couldn’t buy into it. It’s not a terrible movie and it’s contains some beautiful imagery (looked amazing on blu-ray), just not something I’d really watch again.
Movie review: The Strangers
Wow, what a thrill ride. This is a horror movie of the top order. It just throws you into a night of terror. A random night of terror by basically never known assailants. I recently watched The Descent and it suffered from the same kinds of problems that Signs by Shamalan [Blu-ray | DVD]. It ruined the suspense with crazy bad monsters/aliens. The Strangers showed the crazy killers in masks. And unmasked them. But never really showed them. And “You were home” just added to the total random nature of the terror. It was basically all “unexpected” scares, but not bad. There were only EIGHT characters in the whole movie. That’s how focused the movie was on the scary alone. If you like scary movies, this one ain’t bad at all.
Movie review: Deception
middle third
Alright, so I turned 30 today. So I guess it’s time to start a “new life.”
Like many people that means I’m vowing to get into shape! Haha, the lovely wifey got me this yoga bible of sorts. So in addition to some kind of daily exercise, I think I’ll start the yoga soon.
Get it here: “Light on Yoga: The Bible of Modern Yoga…” (B. K. S. Iyengar)
Design rules again
So about a month ago I posted Dieter Rams‘s design rules. They made the rounds again today via Daring Fireball and Kottke.org. So I thought I’d post them again with a little more detail.
- Good design is innovative.
- It does not copy existing product forms, nor does it produce any kind of novelty for the sake of it. The essence of innovation must be clearly seen in all functions of a product. The possibilities in this respect are by no means exhausted. Technological development keeps offering new chances for innovative solutions.
- Good design makes a product useful.
- A product is bought in order to be used. It must serve a defined purpose – in both primary and additional functions. The most important task of design is to optimise the utility of a product.
- Good design is aesthetic.
- The aesthetic quality of a product – and the fascination it inspires – is an integral part of the its utility. Without doubt, it is uncomfortable and tiring to have to put up with products that are confusing, that get on your nerves, that you are unable to relate to. However, it has always been a hard task to argue about aesthetic quality, for two reasons. Firstly, it is difficult to talk about anything visual, since words have a different meaning for different people. Secondly, aesthetic quality deals with details, subtle shades, harmony and the equilibrium of a whole variety of visual elements. A good eye is required, schooled by years and years of experience, in order to be able to draw the right conclusion.
- Good design helps us to understand a product.
- It clarifies the structure of the product. Better still, it can make the product talk. At best, it is self-explanatory and saves you the long, tedious perusal of the operating manual.
- Good design is unobtrusive.
- Products that satisfy this criterion are tools. They are neither decorative objects nor works of art. Their design should therefore be both neutral and restrained leaving room for the user’s self-expression.
- Good design is honest.
- An honestly-designed product must not claim features it does not have – being more innovative, more efficient, of higher value. It must not influence or manipulate buyers and users.
- Good design is durable.
- It is nothing trendy that might be out-of-date tomorrow. This is one of the major differences between well-designed products and trivial objects for a waste-producing society. Waste must no longer be tolerated.
- Good design is consequent to the last detail.
- Thoroughness and accuracy of design are synonymous with the product and its functions, as seen through the eyes of the user.
- Good design is concerned with the environment.
- Design must contribute towards a stable environment and a sensible use of raw materials. This means considering not only actual pollution, but also the visual pollution and destruction of our environment.
- Good design is as little design as possible.
- Back to purity, back to simplicity.