Filmmaniak

Four stories from China about violence, prostitution, corruption and the power of money. The film includes simple symbolism, slight perspective, but all four parts are too long. The protagonists are sympathetic only when they pick up a shotgun/pistol/fruit knife. In addition to the excessive length, the film also has a problem with not knowing when (and how) to end.

Basically, I have a lot of reservations about The Hobbit, but I still have to admit that Jackson did a good job, though not always as he intended. Dividing the story into three parts turned out to be a terrible solution to the small content of the original book, and it just kills the film. A number of additional motifs, sub-plots and links were added to the austere story, and they are mostly completely useless and only extend the runtime. The Hobbit cannot be compared to any of The Lord of the Rings films, but the film is not that much of tragedy in terms of other ordinary productions. Rather than an epic fantasy, however, the film is reminiscent of an adventurous fairy tale for younger audiences. It’s a weaker version of The Lord of the Rings without grandeur and destiny. 60%

I don't understand how it is possible that the second Paranormal Activity has a worse rating than the first one. In the first film, the duvet was just rising into the air and the door was slamming, and there was a lot of chatter. It was really boring nonsense. At least there is something really going on in this one, and although it's not anything special at the beginning (a pool cleaner, falling pans, doors banging again...), it gradually escalates and from the halfway point I was often staring with my mouth wide open. I also have to appreciate the clever connection to the first part. The conclusion could be better and the filler from the first half should be edited a little more, but otherwise I do not have many reservations this time. This is an obvious example that the well-known rule that sequels tend to be worse is not always the case.

Much better than No Strings Attached, but it's also no prize. The whole thing follows a typical template from beginning to end. Far more sympathetic and believable than the main protagonists were almost all of the supporting characters, undoubtedly the best of which was the perfect Woody Harrelson. The guy is just divine. I also expected it to be even funnier, even though the gag with the mobile app to identify "women's days" is perfect.

Blood, slime, vomit, intestines, feces, disgust, goats and zombie chickens possessed by Indian ghosts. Yeah, it's shit. But it's also full of original elements and fun gags. In addition, it is a great parody, and not only of the fast-food industry. It is spoiled only by the poor singing sections, which the creators could have left out. Otherwise, typical TROMA.

A perfect example of complete dementia, which does not make sense for even a moment. Fortunately, this is not meant to be watched for its dialogues or logic, but rather because for the technological computer masturbation and the possibility to enjoy the action scenes, which are once more ball-busting. The first twenty minutes are good, the last hour is as exciting as it should be, but the hour of filler in between is totally boring. The first Transformers therefore remain the best part of the trilogy.

Absolute crap, which was to be expected based on its name. Fortunately, it's quite entertaining and it looks good, and the few one-liners were worth it. The Indians shooting arrows at the space monsters with their bows is definitely the craziest thing that you can see in cinemas this summer, except for maybe The Smurfs. Perfectly corny. But in the end there are plenty of things that aren’t logical, Olivia Wilde is as annoying as the Mexican child, and it is a great pity that the tough Ford turns soft in the last third. Undemanding fun? Undoubtedly.

A brilliant passage with Indians, some great jokes and Danny Glover exchanging glances with Mel Gibson and his "I'm too old for this shit!" brought me to my knees. However, this does not overcome the fact that Maverick is too much of an excessive spectacle, that it’s not smooth in many scenes, that it is predictable and that Annabelle is by far the biggest and most insidious bitch in Jodie Foster’s career, who is otherwise lovely and charming.

Wes Craven's concept was extended to two slow-moving hours, which did not benefit the film. The first half is boring and stupid, and the violence isn’t overdone. The rape in the woods won't really make you feel any less lethargic. From the middle onwards the story turns into a purebred exploitation film combined with a revenge film. It features one remarkable twist, as well as games with a garbage disposal and a microwave oven. Finally, horror fans will be satisfied. Another way of looking at it is that this mess deserving one star improved, over a few short minutes, into deserving at least an average score.

A film of two extremes. At one point it's a perfectly flaring, greatly entertaining, action-packed and almost ingenious ride full of energy and spectacular shots, whilst at other points it's a dragging, boring and stupid show of meaningless dialogues. The sequences where the viewer has fun or is bored alternate regularly. Whenever someone started talking, I tried to look at the ground and not listen. Terrible. On the other hand, when the shooting started, I couldn't look away from the screen. Fantastic perfect worlds. The film was worth seeing just for the German soldier zombies from the First World War powered by a steam engine with a watch. Great. But all of this gloss is wrapped in a dull story set in a nuthouse, which is completely useless and uninteresting. Sucker Punch is like a really beautiful painting set in a really ugly frame. Overall, it’s average.