Review Bunker is a review blog where the goal is simply to review everything. Below are the latest reviews. In the About section you can read more about this blog and it's author. Comments are always appreciated, so if you've got something to say, please feel free!
Welcome to Review Bunker!
Archive for the 'Movies' Category
The third movie in a successful series of heist films, Ocean’s Thirteen did not disappoint - especially when compared to it’s predecessor, Ocean’s Twelve. I loved the fast pace of this film, as well as the “revenge” aspect to the storyline. Much like the other films, “Thirteen” involved a highly complicated plot to score a huge pile of money. The intricacies of the plan were clever and involved, keeping me interested in the progression, and as expected, the movie ends with a few plot twists that make you smile.
Some people might find that “Ocean’s Thirteen” is too predictable, but I feel that it varied enough from the first two in the series to set it apart, and it had many unique facets. Of course, the humor that marked the original two films is again present here - and done quite well. The entire cast of stars did an impressive job of not only working together, but once again playing their unique characters nicely. The ‘headliner’ Al Pacino does an especially great job at playing the ‘bad guy’ prick.
The only aspect of this film that I didn’t like was the showcase of non-existent and unlikely technological gadgets and computer tricks that the team is able to pull out of nowhere to complete their feat. I expected some of this imaginary gadgetry, as in the previous films, but I feel that this time it might have gotten just a bit too ridiculous.
If you were a fan of either of the first two Ocean’s movies, this is definitely a must-see - it is fun, involving, and clever.
What did you think of this movie? Have any movie recommendations for me?
If you enjoyed this post, Please consider subscribing to my full-post feed, or subscribing to receive my posts by email. Also, please check out my contribute and get reviewed pages. Have anything to say? Please comment!
I did not get a chance to see Beowulf at the theatre, despite being recommended the 3D version by multiple people. Fortunately, the DVD was released yesterday, and we rented it from a redbox. Here is my quick review:
Plot: This film stayed surprisingly true to the original epic poem. Of course, there was a lot of modernization, and some semi-major plot changes, but the overall theme was kept, and a lot of the plot works out the same way in the end. I expected a lot more to be different, coming from Hollywood. Either way, this turned out to be a good movie, with an action packed plot that kept me engaged. Having Beowulf yell out his own name at the top of his lungs multiple times seemed to be a bit ridiculous, but I guess it made for good trailer footage.
Acting: This film appears to be animated, but motion capture techniques were used, so it’s hard to know whether physical acting skill can be judged. I can say that the motion capture animation looked very impressive, and it made for a unique and interesting visual style. Also, I can say that the voice-over work was all pretty decent.
Soundtrack: The music in this movie was nothing amazing, but it seemed to fit well with the action, and helped set the mood, as it should.
Overall: Not a bad movie - it kept me involved, and I can imagine how it must have been fun to watch in 3D. I wasn’t amazed by anything in Beowulf, and I wouldn’t necessarily want to see it again, but it was fun to watch once. They could have toned down some of the bad-ass vibes that were a bit overwhelming, and didn’t seem to fit this film like they did so well in 300.
Beowulf (2007): 
3.5/5
3.5/5
What did you think of this movie? Did you see it in 3D?
If you enjoyed this post, Please consider subscribing to my full-post feed, or subscribing to receive my posts by email. Also, please check out my contribute and get reviewed pages. Have anything to say? Please comment!
Before “Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street” was released I had never heard of the Stephen Sondheim musical of the same name, and I have never been a Tim Burton fanboy, so I feel that I’ve approached this film from a neutral place. The only things I knew about Sweeney Todd going into the theatre were that it stars Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham-Carter, and that it is a bloody revenge story. Also, I have heard a lot of commotion about how well the film has been received by critics and movie-goers both, so I was expecting a good film - and sadly, I have to say I was disappointed.
Actually, disappointed might not be the best word to describe how I feel after seeing Sweeney Todd - disturbed and disgusted are better descriptions. I tried my best to see the humor and playfulness in the gory action - but I don’t feel that Depp and Burton quite did their job this time, and instead of coming across as humorous this movie was more dark, gloomy, and foul. The large pools and fountains of blood didn’t bother me as much as I thought they might, but other aspects of the film did turn my stomach. I know what you might be thinking, since when is Burton not dark and gloomy? I did expect a certain level of Burton-esque styling, but I felt this was more horror/gore than I’ve ever seen in a Burton film, and I didn’t like it. Of course, the normal Burton style is present as well, and he did an impressive job in providing the audience with a convincing setting.
Looking beyond the gore, I have to say that I was a bit disappointed in the seemingly shallow way the plot played out - the focus on revenge may have been too great, taking away from other parts of the plot that could have been developed a bit better. Don’t get me wrong, I love revenge stories more than most people, but I couldn’t help but feel that the plot was too singularly focused. Also, I think I am a bit shocked that the “hero” of this movie was so deranged, but I am in the process of trying to accept just how dark some movies can be.
On the upside, I thought the lyrics in all of the songs were amusing, that the songs were good, and the singing was excellent. The music flowed well with the rest of the film, and added most of the humor. I think all of the actors with singing parts did a great job.
The acting in this film was also very good, and I was happily surprised to see Alan Rickman once again playing an antagonist. Depp’s character didn’t have a whole lot of depth, but he played the “demon” quite well. Helena Bonham-Carter was very convincing, and even all of the more minor roles were acted very well.
Sadly, I think the gore and revenge overwhelmed this film, and it definitely left me with a lost appetite, and a disturbed feeling overall. Maybe I missed something, or maybe I am just not the right person to see the wonder of Sweeney Todd, but I have to say that at this point, I would rather not watch it ever again.
Review: Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street (2007): 2.5/5
2.5/5
I know most of you out there will totally disagree with my verdict (87% of you, according to Rotten Tomatoes) - so here’s your chance - convince me that I am wrong, and that I should see it again, I’ll be waiting.
If you enjoyed this post, Please consider subscribing to my full-post feed, or subscribing to receive my posts by email. Also, please check out my contribute and get reviewed pages. Have anything to say? Please comment!
Being a manly man, I obviously can’t consent to going to chick flicks very often, and I certainly can’t be caught reviewing them here on Review Bunker, so I have decided to bring in my girlfriend, Crystal, who I accompanied to the romantic comedy, “27 Dresses” last night. She will be here to answer a few review questions about the movie for my audience, so I can remain manly, and you all can hear about this new movie.
Me: “Did you enjoy 27 Dresses? Why?”
Crystal: “Yes. I liked it because it was a happy movie that I can see myself watching multiple times, and even though it was predictable, it was still entertaining.”
Me: “What did you think of the performances of Katherine Heigl, James Marsden, and the other supporting cast members?”
Crystal: “I thought, that even though some of them played quirky and obsessive characters [ex: Katherine Heigl’s Jane], they portrayed real characters that were relatable. I was able to think of people that I know in real life, that were similar to some of the characters in the movie.”
Me: “Were there any actors that you think did a poor job?”
Crystal: “Not really, actually I think one of the things that made it a good movie was that everyone in it acted very well. ”
Me: “What was your favorite part about the plot?”
Crystal: “I enjoy romantic comedies, but not necessarily romance movies, so I appreciated that they didn’t make the movie too mushy.”
Me: “Did you find it funny enough to be considered a comedy?”
Crystal: “Yes, it wasn’t over the top comedy, and instead the humor fit within the plot, and they didn’t seem to be trying to add comedy to the script.”
Me: “Did you ever find yourself bored with the plot, were there any slow parts?”
Crystal: “No, not really, even though I had an idea of what was probably going to happen at the end, it was still entertaining and paced well. I am glad that the plot didn’t get dragged out, going back and forth endlessly.”
Me: “Did the soundtrack stand out at all?”
Crystal: “mmmm… not really.”
Me: “Did you think they portrayed weddings accurately?”
Crystal: “Some of the themed cultural weddings seemed too unrealistic and odd, but at the same time they added humor to the movie.”
Me: “If you had to give the movie a rating between 0 and 5 stars, what would it be?”
Crystal: “I guess maybe a 4.5 because I really liked it, and I am comfortable with the predictability, and I expected it, so I won’t count that against it.”
27 Dresses (2008): 4.5/5
4.5/5
So, there you go! Crystal, who likes romantic comedies, gives this one a 4.5 out of 5 - so if you are looking for an upbeat, happy, funny, and romantic movie to see, check this one out, and then come back and tell us what you thought.
If you enjoyed this post, Please consider subscribing to my full-post feed, or subscribing to receive my posts by email. Also, please check out my contribute and get reviewed pages. Have anything to say? Please comment!
I went to see a New Year’s Day movie today, something I don’t usually have the pleasure of doing, but which was a fun way to spend a few hours on this lazy holiday. Luckily, we were able to get to the theater before evening set in, so the chintzy side of me was very happy to pay matinée price for a movie that I didn’t have high expectation for, and now you wonderful people get to hear what I though about “National Treasure: Book of Secrets.” Unlike some movie reviews I’m not going to give you a plot summary, just my impressions of the movie overall - I am not yet sure what the best format for movie reviews will be here at Review Bunker, but let’s call this my test case - feel free to tell me what you think (but keep in mind that I am still getting over the flu, before you judge me). Anyway, on to the review…
Assuming you can stand Nicolas Cage playing a know-it-all history nerd/action hero, and a movie chock full of incredibly far-fetched and action packed clue finding & treasure hunting scenarios, then “National Treasure: Book of Secrets” doesn’t turn out all that bad, especially for a sequel. I imagine that the screenwriter could have come up with a more impressive name than “Book of Secrets” - but I do have to admit after watching the film, the name unfortunately does fit in with the plot. I would certainly not recommend seeing this movie if you haven’t seen the first “National Treasure” - there are far too many things that go unexplained otherwise. Also, I would recommend that if you have seen the first movie, be prepared to see a lot of the same type of puzzle solving Indiana Jones/Mission Impossible type action that is portrayed in the first film - albeit, with new plot twists.
The plot of “Book of Secrets” does have a good pace to it, and has enough unique story to keep the audience interested, but you will find yourself being subtly reminded of the first “National Treasure” film consistently throughout “Book of Secrets.” Also, you may be disappointed (or thrilled, depending on your opinion) to find that the cast of treasure hunters from the first movie has barely changed in this sequel, making the two movies seem even more similar than they probably should.
Luckily, “Book of Secrets” is able to pull off a few jokes, providing some entertainment for the audience - mostly through the comic relief of Justin Bartha’s character, Riley Poole. Consequently, if you happen to watch this movie and you spend a good deal of time trying to figure out why Justin Bartha’s voice is so familiar, I’ve solved the mystery for you - he sounds eerily similar to comedian Patton Oswalt (you can thank me later for saving you the mental anguish).
Unfortunately, the ultimate motive of the movie’s principle antagonist seems so weak and improbably once you reach the climactic finish, that the power of the entire plot is diminished. If you are able to see past this fact, you may also be disappointed in how similar the end of “Book of Secrets” is to the original “National Treasure.” If you can see past both of these flaws, the movie ends decently, and is obviously well set up for movie #3 - hopefully for the third movie they have a better title planned than “Book of Secrets.”
So, if you are planning on seeing a movie sometime in the near future, and you enjoyed the first “National Treasure,” this sequel would be a decent choice - just be prepared to not be totally blown away.
National Treasure: Book of Secrets: 3/5
3/5
Did you see a movie over the holidays? Have you seen “Book of Secrets”? What did you think?
If you enjoyed this post, Please consider subscribing to my full-post feed, or subscribing to receive my posts by email. Also, please check out my contribute and get reviewed pages. Have anything to say? Please comment!
Latest Comments