Friday, August 27, 2010

The Other Guys (1/2 star)

   I get that The Other Guys was a send up to seventies buddy cop movies. I get that with Adam McKay and Will Ferrell, it would include ridiculous, off the wall jokes. I get that improve has the potential to be funny, really really funny. Unfortunately, The Other Guys was a painful string of poor SNL-esque skits that were rolled together into a dreadfully thin ball of yarn. It’s weak story line and flat one dimensional characters were far too powerful and unbearable to form any kind of watch-able film. When I wasn’t shaking my head at some of the pathetic jokes, I was wondering when the movie would end, so that I could go home and watch a film worth my time. The Other Guys was all around bad, with no redeeming qualities whatsoever.  
   I believe it is safe to say that one should stay away from any Will Ferrell movie that comes out in the future. He is a one note actor who is in desperate need of some range and after watching him in this “film,” I realized that I would be okay never seeing him in another movie again. Do something different. Please! Stranger Than Fiction was a wonderful film, stretch out your talent again! I feel like Will Ferrell’s movies are  different stale genres that are recycled from throw away scripts. Then followed by the insertion of a slightly tweaked familiar persona of himself, blended with improve, which 9 times out of 10, fails. From figure skater to basketball player to race car driver to cop, Will Ferrell always plays someone similar, with the only difference being his costume. 
   If there was a sequel to Step Brothers, with the main characters becoming cops, this would be the closest thing to it. The humor is very comparable. And I use the word humor very loosely. In my opinion, the hilarity well has run dry for Will Ferrell, very dry. Can he do another great film or are those days too far gone? Anchorman was incredible... and then there were pale imitations like The Other Guys.
   I had descent hopes for this film. The trailer looked funny. Rotten Tomato gave it a 76%. Michael Keaton, one of my favorite actors, played the police captain. I mistakenly thought that I would enjoy an entertaining film and at the very least, have some laughs. Instead, I was served characters that I didn’t care about, including one of the stupidest back-stories EVER. Mark Wahlberg was a joke and not in the funny way. Michael Keaton was severely underused. The crime that “the other guys “ were attempting to solve wasn’t that interesting, nor was the villain behind it. Samuel L. Jackson and Dwayne Johnson’s characters were killed off way too early in the film and for what felt like a wasted joke. I think that the film would have been much stronger with the two of them in it. Hell, the film would have been much stronger if it was done completely differently.
The Breakdown
Plot: 0 stars
Actors/Characters: 0 stars
Genre: 0 stars
Technical Aspects: 1/2 star

Friday, August 13, 2010

Let The Right One In (3 1/2 stars)

   Vampires have firmly planted their blood loving selves in the movie world, television land, and throughout most of bookdom. People have been obsessed with these blood sucking creatures and I don’t blame them. They are riveting characters that can be used symbolically to represent different things within society. Vampires are almost always seen as outcasts and often represent the minority. This correlation is used successfully in the film, Let The Right One In.
   This 2008 Swedish film centers on a boy named Oskar (Kåre Hedebran), who is constantly bullied at school. He has no friends and often fantasizes about standing up to these bullies. Oskar is lonely until he meets another outcast, Eli (Lina Leandersson). The two gradually become friends and hang out together every night, in the winter cold. Only, Eli is not just any outcast. She is a vampire. Despite this, the two friends fall in love. Each enamored with the other. 
   One thing that I particularly liked about this film is how grounded in reality it felt. Vampires are often portrayed as sophisticated coffin dwelling men from the 18th century. Let The Right One In puts the vampire curse on a 12-year old girl in a modern setting. Her father or guardian must become a killer, in order to supply Eli with blood, so that she can survive. The murder scenes are disturbing, since they feel so gritty and real. The father is so calculated in his methods, implying that he has been doing this sort of thing for a long time. 
   Despite his devotion, Eli seems ungrateful towards her father, often ordering him around like a child. He clearly cares for her. Perhaps he was somehow responsible for what she has become and feels a sense of guilt; therefore, resorts to killing for her survival. The film never reveals why this man is so devoted to Eli. The most logical conclusion being that he is her father.
   In one scene, the viewer watches Eli pretend to be a girl in need on the streets and then suck the life out of a nice guy trying to help. She kills out of a need to survive, yet the people she kills do not deserve this fate. It’s troubling to see how cold and unrepentant Eli is towards her actions. At the same time, I never felt an emotional connection to the people she killed. Not once, was I upset over her victims’ deaths.
   Oskar is the one person that Eli connects with. She would never harm him intentionally, but it is clear throughout the film that the temptation of blood can be uncontrollably appealing for a vampire. In turn, creating tension when the two hang out, making the viewer wonder: If Eli gets desperate enough, would she kill Oskar? 
   Poor Oskar, a nice kid targeted by three bullies. They call him “piggy,” play cruel pranks on him, and even whip him with a stick so they can get him to do what they want. Although the murder scenes are intense and the blood sucking scenes are frightening, it is these schoolyard bullying scenes that disturbed me the most. The fact that kids could be so cruel to someone else, just for the sake of being cruel, is heartbreaking. Oskar never did anything that would warrant such physical and mental abuse. 
   Eli encourages Oskar to fight back. She doesn’t understand why he would let the kids get away with doing those things to him. When Oskar finally takes a stand, it is such a gripping moment. I wanted to cheer because the feeling of excitement was so electrifying. The underdog finally got his moment of glory. His fantasy had become a reality. Oskar stood over his tormentor smiling, as if to say, I’m not afraid of you anymore.
   To counter that adrenaline pumping scene, it is eventually followed by the most terrifying scene of all. The final scene takes place in the school’s pool. Oskar’s life is in danger, leaving me squirming in my seat. One part of me worried for his life, the other angry that something so evil could occur to such a nice kid. How the danger is resolved is truly remarkable. And the way it was filmed from Oskar’s point of view made it more spine-chilling because the director did not show the audience every gory detail. He left much open to the imagination, like old school horror films were so masterful at doing. I find that films that show too much gore, mainly torture, are not frightening. They are disgusting. The scariest parts in films are often when something is implied and your mind’s eye forms the visual. 
   This scene is followed by a short epilogue. It felt unrealistic and  unnecessary. I think this little scene was pointless and took away from the punch of the previous scene. The film would have ended stronger in the pool area. Despite this minor hiccup, it does not tarnish the film as a whole.  
   Let The Right One In is a horror film from yesteryear. Equal parts drama and horror. Not once overindulging in the other, but using the two genres to better a story and elevate it to greatness. No pointless killing scenes. No meaningless teenagers being killed with a hook or machete. No poor acting followed by buckets full of blood. Just good old fashioned horror based in reality. Both in terms of the vampire and schoolyard bullying scenes. 
The Breakdown:
Plot: 4
Characters: 3
Genre: 4
Technical Aspects: 3

Monday, August 9, 2010

Triangle (3 stars)

   This Australia/New Zealand film received no attention in the United States. It was not one of the few foreign films that were lucky enough to grace our theaters. Does that mean that it is a waste of time? Far from it. This gem may have missed the U.S. market, but it should not miss anyone’s film gazing eyes. Watch Triangle and be prepared to have your mind spin in an intensely suspenseful circle that will leave you entertained for ninety-eight minutes. 
   The best part of all, the viewer has to use their mind to make connections and interpret things that happen within the film. I found myself constantly trying to figure out what was going on as the film unraveled in a unique story that was refreshingly original. 

   Personally, I enjoy movies that make me think and force me to come to my own conclusions. I feel more involved in the film because I’m striving to make sense of things. Films that lay everything out in the open can be wonderful films, but they often don’t leave a lasting impression in my mind. It’s the films that make my heart race and mind spin with twists coming  from every which way that truly satisfy my film watching appetite.
   This film does not feature any well-known actors and it’s nice to not be distracted by big name performers. The movie becomes less about which Hollywood star is featured in the film and more about the characters within the context of the story. All of the actors were well cast and do a fine job in their roles. They are all believable and genuine. Jess (Melissa George) is convincing as a stressed out mother who is terrified to find herself on a bizarrely deserted ship after her friend’s boat capsizes during a storm. All she wants to do is go home to her son and she is forced to endure the eccentricities that the ship beseeches upon her and her friends. 
   While I was watching Triangle, I kept being reminded of Momento. Not that the stories have anything in common whatsoever, but due to the fact that both films are uniquely edited in a way that compliments their stories. Momento was told in a nonlinear fashion so that the viewer was in the mindset of someone with short-term memory loss. Triangle picks up in the middle of the story and was edited in a way that made you feel Jess’s frustration as she experienced extreme deja vu. Both films used the nonlinear editing to help the viewer become closer to the character’s mindset. You felt as they felt. This technique is effective in fully immersing the viewer into the film. For both films, I was hooked and desperately wanted to know what was going on. 
   Triangle is the type of film that raced through my mind for days after watching. I would try to connect the dots and come up with a viable conclusion. I finally struck “connection gold” while working out, nearly colliding with the wall as the revelation came to me so unexpectedly.
   SPOILER ALERT: The rest of the review goes into detail about what I feel the ending meant in the context of the film. It reveals key elements of the plot. If you do not want to know the ending, cease reading immediately. 
   The last scene of the movie is the key to understanding the entire film. Approaching that scene, we learn that Jess has been repeating the same actions at least twenty times, if not more. On the ship, she sees a pile of her lockets as well as a pile of dead Sally's (Rachael Carpani). She also runs into her friends, even after they have died. They continue to board the ship after their boat capsizes. It is as if someone hit the rewind button. The biggest shock is that she interacts with herself. The viewer watches as she gradually becomes the killer that she was originally trying to escape.

   Jess eventually makes it back to land. Only, the mystery doesn’t end there. She sees herself abusing her son Tommy (Joshua McIvor) in her home and becomes so infuriated by the sight, that she bludgeons her “evil” self to death. Jess then takes Tommy and her dead body into her car. While driving, she hits a seagull. She pulls over and throws the seagull down by the water into a pile of many other dead seagulls. At this point, it is glaringly obvious that Jess is stuck in an endless circle. It is as if a record needle is skipping, repeating the same song in her life over and over again. 
   After Jess’s car crashes into a semi-truck, people rush over to help. Tommy is dead on the street, as is the previously dead “evil” Jess. The Jess who was driving the car, stands by without a scratch on her, watching the horrific scene unfold. No one takes notice of her. It is as if she is invisible.
   A taxi driver approaches her and asks if she wants a lift. He wears a short black shirt, reminiscent of a priest. It is my belief that the Jess we have been following for the entire movie was dead the whole time. She is stuck in this self-imposed limbo because of the guilt she feels for the car wreck that not only killed herself, but also her son. She has created this fictional scenario in an effort to save her son. Sadly, this feat is impossible. She is doomed to repeat this tragedy until she can come to grips with it and move on to the next phase of her life.
   The taxi driver is willing to take her to heaven when she is ready; however, Jess wants to return to the dock, go back on the same boat that will inevitably capsize, and start the race to save her son all over again. 
   I think the “evil” Jess is Jess fearing that she wasn’t a good enough mother to her son when she was alive. She wishes she had been more patient and loving towards him. She has this uncontrollable sense of guilt.
   I also don’t believe that Jess ever went sailing with Greg (Michael Dorman) before. I think he was a customer she met at the restaurant she worked and he invited her sailing. Due to her son, she always turned him down. Now that she is dead, she sees the boat as a way to sail home. Sadly, it is a home that no longer exists. One that was shattered by a car crash.
   Triangle is well-made, thought out, and gripping to watch. It is advertised as a horror film, yet it has very few jump out of your seat moments. Triangle is more along the lines of a supernatural suspense film. The story flows well and the editing of the film compliments Jess's freaked out experience, creating a high level of intensity and curiosity for the viewer to devour. In the end, Triangle is a heartbreaking film, but one that should definitely be watched and enjoyed. For it is these little films that escape the public's narrow film watching line of sight that can surprise and entertain us the most. 
The Breakdown:
Plot: 4 stars
Acting/characters: 3 stars
Genre: 3 stars
Technical Aspects: 3 stars
Overall: 3 stars

Wednesday, August 4, 2010

The Prestige (4 stars)

   Magic seems like it would have been most exciting before the turn of the twentieth century- a time when there were no cars, no airplanes, no movies, and no internet. The tricks conjured up by magicians must have seemed more real and awe-inspiring than they do today. Their audiences weren’t desensitized by the media that now constantly floods the minds of every American. I’m not saying that magic shows aren’t fun anymore, because they most certainly can be. Sadly, the shows have lost their significance in the entertainment world and are generally relegated to places like Las Vegas or hour long television specials. 
  Action scenes in films with CGI and special effects are now passed off as modern day wizardry, until one watches the making of documentary featured on most DVD/Blu Rays. Once the tricks are revealed, the magic vanishes into thin air. It is as if the trick were obvious from the beginning. Nothing more than a fancy parlor trick. The viewer is left with the faint gasp of intrigue, the mind vaguely remembering how special it looked on film before knowing how the magic was achieved. For a magician, their deceptions are meaningless without the coveted secrets behind them.
  The Prestige successfully reveals its secrets in a way that changes everything you thought you knew about the film, thus creating new exhilarating conundrums to ponder once the credits roll. It is rare to be completely thrown off guard while watching a film and The Prestige is one of those films that I felt I had figured out. Then it flipped itself on its head with an abundance of twists and turns. I was struggling to keep up and patiently waiting with a huge smile plastered on my face as all the pieces fell into place, revealing the truth behind the character’s tricks and lives. The magic was overwhelming (in a good way) as it went from entertainment to tragedy, and finally to a struggle between two magicians who one-up the other and ultimately destroy each other’s lives. 
  The Prestige successfully blends the genres of drama, period film, science fiction, and suspense thriller into one glorious achievement of cinema. It plays you, the viewer, the whole entire time, like any good magician should. The film introduces the pledge, followed by the ever-intriguing turn, and completely astonishes the audience with a bold and unforeseen prestige. 
SPOILER ALERT: The rest of the review touches on key elements of the film, including how it ends. If you have yet to see the film or do not wish to know its intimate details, cease reading immediately.
For most of the film, it is evident that Alfred Borden (Christian Bale) is this complex individual who is cold and somewhat heartless. He only seems concerned with himself and his magic,  emitting an evil vibe that the viewer easily accepts. Alfred went against what Cutter (Michael Caine) and Robert Angier (Hugh Jackman) told him not to do and tied an unsafe knot that Robert’s wife could not slip out of during a magic show performance. This led to her drowning and the spark that started the professional and personal rivalry between Robert and Alfred.
Robert is naturally the wounded hero who was cheated out of happiness because Alfred was too pig-headed to think logically and safely. Alfred continues this carelessness in magic with his bullet catching trick, which doesn’t take long to backfire when Robert sticks a real bullet in the gun. 
As the viewer, I felt an instant connection to Robert. I was devastated for his tragic loss and I wanted him to cause Alfred pain because Alfred seemed to move on with his life too easily. I loved that Robert took the brilliance of Alfred’s tricks, mainly The Transported Man, and put his own, more exciting spin on it. As far as I was concerned, Robert could do whatever he sought fit to humiliate and outdo Alfred. I wanted Robert to succeed and take everything that Alfred loved away from him, like Alfred had to him. 
The movie continued to build this back and forth rivalry between the two central characters until hitting a crescendo, with Alfred being wrongfully accused of murdering Robert. The brilliant reveal showed that Robert may have died, but it was only one version of him that died. The machine that Tesla (David Bowie) built for him had actually cloned him. He continued to lived through this cloned version of himself. Sure Robert had to kill his original self every time he used the machine, but he didn’t really die since his mind was still in tack in the new cloned version of himself. 
I find it fascinating that the ultimate magic trick in the film is no trick at all. It has no aces up the sleeves. It includes no tom-foolery. It is real. There is no logical explanation. I love it. People always demand answers and secrets to magic tricks so the illusion can be shattered; however, this illusion is fool proof. Mainly, due to the fact that it is no illusion at all. What makes it even scarier, is the price that Robert has to pay to ensure that his “trick” is successful. Yet I wonder, what would have happened if he didn’t kill himself after each time he used the machine? Could hundreds of Roberts be living a normal life in England? Would they all want to be magicians? Wouldn’t a magic trick with clones completely mystify an audience and ensure that you are the greatest magician of all time? And how ironic is it that Alfred is convicted of murdering Robert, when in fact, Robert committed suicide, but in a strange twist still lives? My mind hurts from all these revelations and what-if possibilities.
To top that twist, if possible, the realization that Alfred is actually two twin brothers is the more grounded and “oh my God, I can’t believe I missed that!” magic trick. The fact that two men are so devoted to their art that they would live a single life in order to be seen as one great man seemed so obvious after it was divulged. 
One of the brothers (Alfred 1) was more reckless and driven. I feel this brother was the one who tied the wrong knot on Robert’s wife. This brother was the one who wanted to take big risks and couldn’t help but sneak a peak backstage at Robert’s show. Then being wrongfully accused of murder and sentenced to death.
The other brother (Alfred 2) seemed to have a gentler side. One who wanted to settle down with a wife and family. One who went to Robert’s wife’s wake to send his condolences. One who wanted to move past the rivalry. Unfortunately, living two halves of one life cost them both dearly. Alfred 2 lost the woman of his dreams. She was so depressed over her husband’s constant mood swings that she killed herself. Alfred 1 lost Olivia (Scarlett Johansson), the woman he loved, due to his rivalry with Robert and his apparent coldness towards his “wife’s” death. A woman he did not love. A woman his brother loved.   
It was Robert’s obsession with revenge that turned him into a monster. By the end of the film I felt betrayed, tricked, bamboozled. The Robert I thought I knew would let Alfred die for “killing” him? Robert dug the knife in deeper by taking custody of the only thing Alfred had left, his daughter... well, his brother’s daughter. Still, one could tell that Alfred 1 cared for her just the same.
Robert’s whole ambition up until the film’s credits reveal that he had become the villain. He could have stopped the murder trial by revealing his “trick.” He could have allowed Fallon/ Alfred 2 to have custody of the girl. He could have been a decent human being. Instead, he saw a way to punish a man for an accidental death from a trick that was dangerous to perform in the first place. I mean, Robert could just have easily blamed Cutter for not breaking the glass of the water tank fast enough or himself for not being the one who always tied his wife’s hands together. 
I was blown away that another big reveal showed that Robert, the man we as movie goers thought we knew, trusted, and believed in, was actually this sinister being. The true tragic heroes in the film were Alfred 1 and Alfred 2, who selfishly loved magic so much that they destroyed their personal lives; however, neither of them deserved the wrath of Robert. They became the tragic heroes by the film’s conclusion. Alfred 1 killed for no reason (well, Robert would argue for his wife’s death) and Alfred 2 lost his true love because of a life long magic trick he played with his brother. His only solace, the fact that he gets to be with his little girl. 
I found the movie to be many skilled magic tricks stacked together to create one sensational trick that electrified my mind into pure elation. The movie’s end completely changed the way I viewed the characters throughout the entire film. My idea of good versus evil was reversed, leaving me ecstatic when Alfred 2 confronted Robert and avenged his brother’s wrongful hanging.
I loved The Prestige for its ability to be an intense period piece about magicians, then transform into a warped science fiction film, and ending as a revenge thriller with more twists and turns than I can count. This movie makes your mind run at a thousand miles per hour. It is an adrenaline rush of awesomeness. Most importantly, it teaches the viewer not to live one life with your twin. It will only end in misery. Don’t get into a rivalry with another magician. It will only end in misery. Don’t clone yourself. It will only end in misery. And obviously, don’t perform magic because it always leads to... misery. 
The Prestige is a movie that encompasses everything I ever wanted to see in a film and then some. Christopher Nolan has easily become one of the greatest working directors in the movie business. As far as I am concerned, this is one of the best films I have ever had the privilege of seeing. It easily makes my favorite movie list.
The Breakdown:
Plot: 4 stars
Acting: 4 stars
Genre: 4 stars
Technical Aspects: 4 stars
Overall: 4 stars

Monday, August 2, 2010

Dinner for Schmucks (2 1/2 stars)

   Dinner for Schmucks is a movie about businessmen who gather once a month for dinner with idiots, in order to amuse themselves. Sounds mean-spirited and cruel. Put a comedic spin on the premise, and there is a plethora of humor-filled scenes that are so off the wall, you will be begging for air between bouts of laughter. 
  The “idiots” or “schmucks” are bizarre to say the least. Ranging from a woman who talks to dead animals to Therman (Zach Galifinakis), a mind-controlling jackass with great power over Barry (Steve Carell). Rounding out the schmucks, with his unique hobby of placing roadkill mice in “mouseterpieces,” is none other than Barry. He lives by his version of John Lennon’s words, “You may say I’m a dreamer, but I’m not.”
  Steve Carell brings a great deal of heart to his character, in addition to being overbearing and creating many, many, and in case you didn’t catch that, MANY awkward moments that are so painfully uncomfortable they leave you squirming in your seat. If you thought Michael Scott from The Office created a wealth of those moments, Barry from Dinner for Schmucks takes it to the next level and beyond.

   SPOILER ALERT: The rest of the review touches on some key plot points and scenes. If you have yet to see the film and do not wish to know these elements, cease reading now.
Tim (Paul Rudd) is the lucky leading man who gets to reap all the benefits of running into the perfect schmuck for his company’s monthly dinner. He is also fortunate enough to have the same stale storyline from other Paul Rudd comedies (i.e. I Love You, Man, and Role Models). The woman of his dreams decides to break things off and he spends the rest of the movie trying to get her back. The suspense is so overwhelming at times. Will they get back together? Is there enough time before the movie ends? Will they find that magical love... oh wait, I’ve seen this one before. I know how it ends.
  Despite this overused, predictable storyline for the lead, the merriment that fills the scenes working up to that expected ending is well worth the time. Paul Rudd’s Tim is ridiculously likable (as are many of his characters), and paired with the “tornado of destruction” filled Barry- we are left with many memorable scenes leading up to the dinner. 
One unforgettable scene includes a brunch with a wealthy Swiss couple. Barry’s interaction with them is painfully fun. He asks them if their “cheese comes out of the cows with the holes already in it.” Barry also manages to bring Tim’s crazy as hell stalker with to fill in as Tim’s girlfriend. Needless to say, it does not end well for Tim or his car and we get to sip up the hilarity.
Also, any scene featuring Kieran (Jermaine Clement), a schmuck in his own right, kills. Even though he is the artist version of Russell Brand’s Aldous Snow from Forgetting Sarah Marshall and Get Him To The Greek, he is fantastic in his strange animalistic self-obsessed art. He definitely needed to be at the final dinner and his absence was greatly felt. 
The dinner itself is fun, if not a bit of a let down. There is a great deal of anticipation leading up to it and in the end, it satisfies, but doesn’t completely dazzle. The schmucks are bizarre; however, considering how much Barry and Therman are fleshed out, they fall flat. They are mildly amusing, but nothing more.
Overall, Dinner for Schmucks serves up a delectable plate of wonky jocularity that will digest with ease. The appetizers are superb and the main course is acceptable. If you’ve enjoyed other Paul Rudd and Steve Carrell comedies, you will undoubtedly enjoy this one too. Dinner For Schmucks is neither one of their best works nor worst. It is a welcomed addition to an otherwise bland summer for comedy.



The Breakdown:
Originality/uniqueness of Plot: 1 star
Effectiveness of Characters: 3 stars
Effectiveness within Genre: 4 stars
Technical Aspects: 3 stars
Overall Rating: 2 1/2 stars

What's It All About?

   This blog features film reviews and hopefully discussions sparked by the ever so brilliant mind of myself. I enjoy movies more than I should. So much so in fact that they are easily an obsession of mine that I can’t seem to kick. Even if I kicked really really hard.
   I watch movies that span all genres, with my favorites tending to fall under the science fiction, mystery/thriller categories. The best movies are the ones that transport me into the fictional world of film and make me forget that I am watching a movie. I am completely immersed in this realm. On the contrary, the movies that make me want to bash my head against the wall until unconscious, tend to fall under the worst movie category. 
  When reviewing films, I look at four things. The first of which is the originality of the plot. If the storyline is riveting and tends to be unpredictable, I consider it to be a great plot. Anything less or a remake that refuses to separate itself from the original film, would deserve a lower rating.
  The characters within a film need to be fully developed and must be played convincingly by the actors. Films that either miscast their roles or with flat characters, leave me bored and less connected to the film. A film may have a great story, but if the characters are not convincing, then it is wasted.
The effectiveness of a film within its genre is the third category that I base my overall rating on. Basically, if a comedy fails to draw laughs, it gets a low rating. If a drama fails to be convincing, it gets a low rating. If an action movie fails to wow me with it’s action sequences, it gets a low rating. And so on and so on.
The technical aspects of the film is the final category that I base my review on. This includes cinematography, directing, editing, and set design. I understand that some films don’t call for elaborate scenery or cutting edge direction and I won’t hold that against them, unless they are blatantly misused. For example, I don’t expect comedies to have the most impressive cinematography and yet they may receive a similar rating as an elaborately made science fiction film because what was done within its genre was adequate. I’ll probably take more notice with the science fiction film’s cinematography; however, certain movies are set in places that will not necessarily impress the audience visually. 
My overall rating is the average rating of the four categories that I grade a movie on, out of four stars. One star signifies a movie that you should not waste your time on. A two star movie is mediocre and should only be rented. A three star movie is good and thoroughly enjoyable. It is by no means a masterpiece; however, it is well worth your time. A four star movie is a must see film. Drop whatever you are doing and watch it with your undivided attention. With this blog, I hope to share my thoughts on films that I have watched and help keep people watching good films that won’t cause massive amounts of wasted time. 

The Breakdown of the Rating System:
Originality/uniqueness of plot: 0-4 stars
Effectiveness of characters and actors within roles: 0-4 stars
Effectiveness of movie within genre: 0-4 stars
Technical Aspects of film: 0-4 stars
Overall Rating: Total from above ratings divided by 16
100%= 4 stars
85%-99%= 3 1/2 stars
70%-84%= 3 stars
55%-69%= 2 1/2 stars
40%-54%= 2 stars
25%-39%= 1 1/2 stars
15%-24%= 1 star
1%-14%= 1/2 star