#6 - "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" (12/22/2012)

"The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" is certainly the most expected movie of the last 5 years. The prequel to the Lord of the Ring triology was highly anticipated. 

Although most of the (new) cast was fairly unknown it was spot on. In particular Richard Armitage manages to impress. He easily takes on the role as the "fighting hero" "Thorin" and doesn't have to fear comparison with Viggo Mortensen's Aragorn. Martin Freeman nails every scene as young Bilbo Baggins closing the gap between Ian Holm and himself. He mimics Holm's moves perfectly giving them the dynamics of a younger version of Bilbo. His facial expressions are priceless and hopefully this movie will get him the public recognition he deserves. Ian McKellen is brilliant as always and including Ian Holm and Elijah Wood in the beginning was a clever move by Peter Jackson to connect this movie even further to the original triology. 

Although we already see Gimli fighting in Lord of the Rings the constant arguing with Legolas turned it into a sort of comic relieve, a good one, don't get me wrong. In this movie we see the dwarves fighting seriously for the first time and  it is fantastic. Without loosing the charactics eastablished in Lord of the Rings they are lifted to central heroes and it works. 

The additions and alterations to the story in comparison to the novel are fitting and organic. The story is fast paced without ever being hectic. I am certain many purists will be upset with them but in my opinion this is an interpretation of the novel, that works perfectly. 

For me the only real downside it that the proportions between the dwarves, the hobbits and humans that were so carefully established in Lord of the Rings, don't always match in this movie. 

All in all the movie is awesome, although it lacks a little of the magic that made the Lord of the Rings unique, but since it is barely the exposition to new triology this can be forgiven. Peter Jackson has once more proven that he is a great director with an eye for details only few possess. 

8/10 points 

#5 - Cloud Atlas

"Cloud Atlas" is in my eyes probably the most ambitious movie of the last ten years, as it has attempted to do what has never been done before: Telling six apparantly unrelated stories in different times but yet in a very subtle way connected after all. Although the movie is not perfect is succeds.

First of all this isn't the movie you want to watch after a tough day of work just to unwind. This is the sort of movie you watch, when you want something that keeps you on your toes. Just like you wouldn't read Shakespeare, while tanning at the beach. After watching the movie a second time I even discovered more nuances and details then watching it for the first time and it amazed me. Rarerly have I seen such a clever composition in modern cinema.

The cast is superb, especially considering that they had to play many different roles incl. changes of sex and etniticity (I know this has been controversial and I will address this matter further below). Tom Hanks, Halle Berry, Jim Sturgess and the amazing Jim Broadbent all nail all their parts. For me the biggest surprise was however Hugh Grant, that despite always being "just" a supporting character is charismatic and courageous when it comes to getting "ugly-fied" by the make-up.

I won't give away any of the story, as it is not essential what the story is but rather the way it is told and for me this was brilliantly done. The only thing I consider a bit of a downside is that it is a rather heavy movie. So think about what sort of movie you want to see. Just some nice popcorn flick on a saturday night or some clever movie you feel the urge to discuss after watching it.

As to the controversity the has been caused by the fact the some european actors play korean roles it frustrates me, as I think the people arguing over this have missed the whole point of this movie completely (or maybe I have).

For me one of the essential messages of the movie is that down the line we are all the same, which is why the same actors were used in all the stories. So we don't have only caucasian actors play asian roles, but also viceversa and we also have men playing women and viceversa and even a black woman playing a jewish woman. To my understanding the fact that the make-up wasn't perfect (although it was amazing) is essential to that, as otherwise it wouldn't have been possible to recongnize the actors in their various roles and this premise would have been lost completely. In my point of view the use of the same actors in different roles was a genius decision by the Wachowskis and Tom Tykwer, the three directors of this movie. And by the way: korean actress Doona Bae also plays a white woman and a mexican woman.

I find it sad people put so much energy into putting down what I consider a piece of art as racist, while there are real problems on this earth such as people being murdered for their beliefs, race or gender. Maybe we should get things in perspective and see where the real problems in the world lie and not argue about a movie  using the term "yellow face" which I find offensive despite not being asian. Otherwise we might end up finding weddings racist because brides use to wear white.

Racism is definetely a serious problem and one of the most despicable things on earth, but I think in this movie and its making none was involved. In my opinion people got upset over something that was barely an artistic idea. 

Points: 8/10

#4 - Seven Psychopaths

Some movies stick with you hours or days after you have seen them and I can tell you "Seven Psychopaths" is that sort of movie!

The cast is superb and the names of Colin Farrell, Sam Rockwell, Christopher Walken and Woody Harrelson speak for themselves. In my opinion this is Colin Farrell's best work, even topping his performance in "In Bruges". He easily jumps from funny to dramatic and back. His facial expressions are fabulous and don't require any words (You will know what I mean, when you see the scene where Sam Rockwell's character asks him for feedback). His timing is perfect and his whole performance is just stunning. 

Sam Rockwell is simply amazing. His role was probably the most diffficult to play in the movie and he does it effortlessly. He delivers even the weirdest lines in such a natural way, that for instances you believe to be watching some strange documentary and that he is his character. Christopher Walken and Woody Harrelson render their usual strong performances. 

What all actors have in common is that you can see how much they actually enjoyed working in this movie. There wasn't a scene that wasn't perfect and straight to the point. Also nice to see was that even the smallest supporting roles were played by great actors (which only adds to the compliment of the wonderful script and writer/director Martin McDonagh). I will just say watch out for: Harry Dean Stanton and Gabouray Sidiba among others. 

They story and directing by Martin McDonagh are fantastic. The script is witty, clever and original in a way I haven't seen in ages, making this the best comedy I have seen in years. Avoiding spoilers I can say this: This script is so cleverly written that it parodies its own obvious weaknesses thus converting them into strengths. This is achieved by using the fact that Colin Farrell's character "Marty" is a script writer himself. One can also tell that McDonagh makes his cast feel comfortable so they can render fantastic performances (one could already tell that from "In Bruges"). 

One thing some people might not enjoy (while I certainly do) is that the humor is sometimes quiet dark. So if this sort of humor is not your thing, you might want to stay away from this movie. 

For me this has been the movie of the year so far, topping everything else I have seen and I hope for all people involved that this is not overlooked by the audience and critics. The chemistry between the whole team is palpable and you know this script couldn't have worked with any other cast but this. It might have, but when watching this you certainly think this is a perfect match. 

10/10 points

#3 - Total Recall

As I mentioned on a few ocasions I am not a friend of remakes, but in this case I wanted to give it a shot, as the story is fantastic and I assume with today's CGI the result would be quiet stunning. 

Let's start with the good parts as usual: Colin Farell is back and in my opinion he is better than ever. He walks the line between character development and action scenes and does so flawless. One only wished he would have gotten a little more to work in the character development department, but the script wouldn't offer more. But Colin Farell is much better as Doug Quaid than Arnold Schwarzenegger. Kate Beckinsale is convincing in the action scenes as well. 

The general looks of the movie is much darker than in the original and reminded me a lot of "Blade Runner". Considering both movies are based on stories by Philip K. Dick this is acceptable as it also fits the story. 

Unfortunately the movie has also some significant weaknesses. While Jessica Biel might be a good actress in this movie her character remains flat and simply looks bored. Also the chemistry between her and Colin Farell is almost none existent, which is not an error of the actors but of the people who cast them as lovers. 

*spoilers*

As for the story: A lot of alterations were made from the original movie and the original short story. Unfortunately most of them were not for the good. "The fall" is the most significant plot hole, which is frustrating as it wasn't in any way neccessary to the story and just added a cool location for the action scenes. 

For my taste it would have been preferable if the movies actions scenes would have been a little less promitent to make room for some addditional character scenes (or they should have just added another 20 minutes to the movie). 

While the movie's "looks" was great it was partly inconsistent with the story e.g. We learn that living space is getting tight yet we see ridiculously large hallways. 

Kate Beckinsale's character "Lori" unfortunately never receives any real character, for she is only portraited as "the villain" not being allowed any shades in her personality she reminds me more of a Terminator than a human being. 

All in all I felt well entertained watching this movie but thought is was a pity that its full potential was not explored. 

Point 6/10

#2 - Magic Mike

First of all I would like to state that I was talked into watching this movie by my niece. This means I didn't expect anything at all from this movie but spending a fun afternoon with my niece. Although when I realised that this had been directed by Steven Sonderbergh I thought I might be in for nice popcorn movie. 

Let's start with the good things. Channing Tatum did a good job playing the lead. His performance is credible and one wished he could have gotten a little more to work with. He got to prove he is a good dancer once more and his routines were the only ones  that weren't boring and looked cool (Because it takes more to a sexy male dance than just move the hips). He was also convincing protraying his character's journey. One can also tell he has worked as a stripper, as he is the only one that is convincing. 

Unfortunately this is where the good parts of the movie end. Most of the dialog was not only flat but just plain stupid. While the story made an atempt to show the decadence of the life style they lead it failed entirely to show any consequences. Two characters take a drug overdose and basically they just sleep it off and that is it. Nobody ever gets pregnant or a veneral disease from sleeping around recklessly. 

I was surprised at Matthew McConauughey's poor performance, which I assume was due to the bad script since he is usually a decent actor. But his character always reminds me of a cartoon. Alex Pettyfer just looked bored throughout the movie. The rest of the strippers remain flat clichés and one couldn't even remember their characters' names. 

In Germany the film was considered suitable for children of 12 years and older (I think in the US it would be PG-13), which in my opinion was totally wrong. The movie has a clear adult theme and since it is protrayed quiet onesided it can be "dangerous" for young kids and teenagers. 

All in all it is a pity, that no more effort was put into the script because the general idea had potential. If the remaining stripper characters weren't going to be doing much acting anyhow, why not bring in real dancers to create some spectarular dance routines (with the expection of Channing Tatum who does some great dancing!). The movie might have worked as comedy with this dialog and the characters but not as a drama.

Points 3/10

#1 - The Dark Knight Rises

#1 - The Dark Knight Rises

Sometimes when you are waiting for months to see a movie, your expectations are unreasonably high. With "The Dark Knight Rises" this was certainly the case, considering its amazing predecessor "The Dark Knight". The more upsetting it is, when the movie disappoints you. 

Let's start with the good parts of the movie. The main cast was absolutely fabulous and really lived up to the expectations. Christian Bale was charismatic as usual and especially convincing in the moments, where we see his character struggle. Anne Hathaway was (at least to me) a surprising choice for "Catwoman" but did a great job. She managed the character's balance between villain and ally believably. Gary Oldman, Sir Michael Caine and Liam Neeson proved once more, why there are among the greatest actors, although one would have wanted more screentime for Liam Neeson and Sir Michael Caine. 

Unfortunately Tom Hardy as the villain Bane couldn't match the rest of the cast. Maybe it was because of the mask his character wears (Which to me seemed like a "Bikini-Version" of the Darth Vader costume) and the voice (which I assume was tweaked electronically) but his acting wasn't convincing at all. In large parts of the movie his character seemed almost ridiculous and in no wy scary or dangerous. Especially if one remembers the amazing villains in "The Dark Knight". 

The action scences are solid at best, but lack creativity. There are too few Batman scences to actually consider this a Batman movie and the once there are lack the dynamics of the first two movies. I haven't stopped it, but it felt like Catwoman got more screentime in costume than Batman. 

*spoilers*

As for the story I was disappointed completely. Not because there was something missing I expected to see, but the other way around. The movie in my point of view tried too much and failed. Large parts reminded me of "Iron Man 2", where we also see our hero struggling until he gets his mojo back. 

Then we have the mourning of the lost love, the nuclear threat, the good guy struggling, the young guy reminding the hero of what he fights for, the love triangle, apparant defeat etc. There were enough story elements for three movies and therefore there wasn't enough time to work them out properly and the story barely scratched the surface. 

There are also large points that are not explained and therefore seem illogic. Maybe the Nolans didn't consider these points important e.g. how does Bruce Wayne get back from a prison in the middle of what seems the Russian Federation, with no money or passport, to Gotham City within a few days? As a writer I get the impression they just didn't want to think of an explanation. Most people might not be bothered by these things but a lot of people are and to me it makes a different between bad and good writing. 

The preparation of Blake as a potential future Batman came too early and too obvious, but the character was built up nicely and definetely could make a worthy successor. 

When Alfred walks out on Bruce Wayne the viewer gets the impression Mr. Caine walked out of the movie, as we only see him back in the end and only very briefly. 

The idea with the pit was a nice touch but again we lack sufficient explanation to really get into it and instead of diving into the scences we are stuck, asking ourselves the questions the movie doesn't answer: Where is the pit? How does Bane control a prison he was an inmate of? etc. 

To sum it up: The movie is in many aspects solid, but at best an average movie. Sometimes less is more and in this case, less story elements worked out better would have done wonders to the movie. The cast did mainly a great job, that saved the movie for me. 

5/10 Points