I have been looking forward to watching Invictus for quite some time now. I was able to finally take the time to watch it (thanks to Redbox availability!). Now I am not wholly sure why I was so looking forward to this story. It could have been the intriguing story of Nelson Mandela and the beginnings of his presidency, or how it so involved the South African Rugby team, or it could have possibly just been the fact that Morgan Freeman was the lead actor. In all honesty, it was probably the latter.
It didn’t dawn on me until the credits had rolled that this was another of Clint Eastwood’s directorial works. I have to say that the movie was engaging, well paced, and overall entertaining. I was able to overlook the somewhat difficult accents both Morgan Freeman and Matt Damon used in this movie. Granted, I am no expert when it comes to South African dialect, but it just felt stiff in comparison to the dialogue heard in “District 9″ (also based in South Africa). That aside, I felt the performances given by each actor was solid and heartfelt.
If you look at this movie as an inspirational sports movie like “Miracle”, “Remember the Titans”, “Rudy” or similar movies, then you will likely be disappointed. If you look at the movie as a journey of a fledgling leader attempting to unite his people through any means necessary, then you will likely enjoy the story. This movie ultimately succeeds in inspiring the viewer with an unlikely combination of politics and sports while rarely ever going “over the top.”
And, to answer your question, which I also asked, of “What does Invictus mean?” Well, I learned that it is Latin for “unconquered”. An apt title for this journey.
|
||||||
|
I guess I am a purest when it comes to movies based off books. The more I think about this movie, the less I like it. Don’t get me wrong, there are several high points to the film:
But, as a whole, I found the movie extremely lacking. I found the general pace of the movie to be slow and found that David Yates (director) tended to focus a lot of screen time to items that seemed inconsequential. And then there was the whole “lack of climax” during the third act. Yes, there is an important event that takes place and it is sad, for those who love the books. However, when a book has several large sequences that, in my opinion, MAKE the book great, one would expect those sequences to get the film treatment. Not so much in HP6. Where was the Battle of Hogwarts? Where was the White Tomb? I sit through this 2+ hour film and am not treated to, arguably, the best scenes in the entire series? How disappointing… By the end of the movie, I have forgotten why I even care who the Half-Blood Prince really is… Yes, I know I have plenty of complaints… it doesn’t mean this movie is necessarily bad, just lacking. If you haven’t read the books, you will probably love this movie. I am just a bit picky when it comes to film adaptations of novels… I would encourage you to see the film because there are some truly great moments, just go into with a heads-up on what to expect.
After a busy weekend or partying, house-cleaning, and hosting, Brandy and I went to relax at the theaters. We obviously went to see “Get Smart” according to the title of this post. Here is a brief synopsis: Maxwell Smart (Steve Carell) is a CONTROL Analyst who dreams to be a field-agent, working alongside his favorite agent, Agent 23 (Dwayne Johnson). CONTROL is then infilitrated by KAOS and compromises the identities of all current field-agents. So the chief (Alan Arkin) promotes Smart to the field as Agent 86 and teams him with the beautiful and deadly Agent 99 (Anne Hathaway). It is up to Agents 86 and 99 to thwart KAOS and save the world from certain destruction. Ok, so there’s the premise of the movie. Since it is based off the comic screwball TV series, I was expecting a series of goofball sight gags and a Maxwell Smart that was equal parts Michael Scott (The Office) and Evan Baxter (Bruce Almighty and Evan Almighty). However, I was pleasantly surprised to see Carell play Maxwell Smart as the straight man and not the incompetent boob. Not to say he wasn’t funny, which he was. I would say overall that Get Smart was a good summer comedy, but definitely not one for the ages. The throwbacks to the original series were quaint and obviously treated with a respectful nostalgia. I don’t think this is one of Carell’s best performances, because it didn’t require him to stretch himself. It was safe, but sufficient. Anne Hathaway brought an elegance to the film as a fashionable, yet strong agent. Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson has certainly come a long way from “The Scorpion King” in this flick. It’s really hard to not like any of these characters. But, my favorite actor in this film has to be Alan Arkin. He steals pretty much every scene he is in. And let’s just mention this… the cameos were great… with the exception of Bill Murray’s odd casting choice. I’m still scratching my head over that one. All in all, Get Smart is good summer comedy. It will not be the best film of the year, nor will it make it to your top 10 comedies of all time. What it is, though, is satisfying film… just don’t expect the sun, moon, and stars. 7/10  If you couldn’t tell from the title of this post, I was a little less than pleased with my time spent with the latest, and hopefully last, installment of the “Indiana Jones” franchise. I knew going in that I should keep my expectations low, because let’s face it — George Lucas hasn’t had a great track record when it comes to bringing back beloved movie franchises from my childhood. Wow — I had no idea what to expect, but what I got wasn’t it. First off, some positive notes. It was great to see Harrison Ford back in action wielding the legendary whip and donning the infamous fedora. He definitely not the action star he used to be, but I wasn’t expecting him to be either. Shia LeBeouf handled his character as well as he could have. Both actors did quite well, provided the schlock they were given. The musical score was a total throwback to the original series – great! Spielberg can create some amazingly beautiful shots. The ant sequence was entertaining as well. Now that we have that out of the way, let’s get to the meat of the matter. I figure I’ll present my complaints in a bulleted format.
This was another reason to dislike George Lucas, or at least what he has become. Without his vision, we wouldn’t have such fond childhood memories, but did he really have to come back and spit on these memories? The acting was decent, the visuals were appealing, the score was exciting, the story was terrible, the dialog was bland. Would I recommend seeing the movie? Yes, but in the comfort of your own home. That way, you won’t feel bad when you want to turn it off and go do something else. |
Misc.NewsShoppingTech |
|||||
|
Powered by WordPress & the Atahualpa Theme by BytesForAll. Discuss on our WP Forum |
||||||
