About Me
Showing posts with label Movie reviews. Show all posts
This, to me, is a fascinating movie. Not because of the story but because of it's commercial value. It seems that local producers are beginning to adapt to modern commercialization. Instead of making short ads, why not a whole movie?! No, no, no, it's premise didn't turned me off, it really did intrigued me. Besides, I enjoyed Google's The Internship and that movie has been labeled as a huge Sell Out by most American critics. Hey, it starred Owen Wilson and Vince Vaughn so of course it would be a simple fun movie. Thus, with tons of sponsorship from big companies, let's review Jejak Warriors.
KELANTAN AT HEART
Coming from a Kelantan family, the dialect really hit me; it was very engaging and natural. The rhythm and poetic lingo of Kelantan dialect put me in a good mood and I wished I could've watched it with my family (Alas, I was watching it alone). We're straight away introduced to the Red Warrior's history through a Dikir Barat (A traditional singing performance from Kelantan). Of course, that is expected and it didn't bothered me much.
...AND THEN IT WENT DOWNHILL
We're introduced to a young boy with a deceased mother and a conservative father. The father detest his fandom of football by forcing him to burn his posters and magazines. Whoa, harsh. A few minutes later, his father died.
WHAT?! ...why?
There were just a lot of sudden dramatic beats in this film.
PRODUCT PLACEMENTS
Sigh. It's a simple movie. A boy travels across states to meet his dream football team. How could you screw that up? Then again, how could you not? It's an absurd corporate movie so expect them to screw it up. The product placement definitely drives the Plot and story. In every turn where the product highlights aren't needed, they put it there anyway. They've build up to such a simple, good and engaging character. I'd assume that they, at least the cast and crew, would know better. There was also this absurd JDT and Red Warriors rivalry backstory that's ridiculously shallow; as if it was written by an angry RD fan that haven't been outside of Kelantan his entire life.
COMMERCIAL VALUE
Alright, so I can poke fun at this movie scene by scene but let's cut to the chase. So, does this movie, at least, lived up to it's hype as a 1 hour ad for RD, Hotlink, Air Asia, UniKL..etc? Well, it didn't performed well in the box office nor did it made an impact at their niche audience (Yes, I do count it as a niche based film). How could they? Kelantan doesn't even allow cinemas in their state. But to be honest though, film marketing in Malaysia is confusing and sad (With all of the shallow mainstream media and all). So, to a certain extent, I think it's unfair to blame it's marketing. I hoped that this movie could have made a big commercial impact (Since that's what it's going for) but it didn't. It's mind boggling, if you ask me. With such a simple premise, how could some Malaysians not be all over this? Well, it did made JDT hire Ahmad Idham to make their own movie. Wonder how that would turn out? -_-
VERDICT
Yep, I'm being optimistic in this review. But no matter how much sympathy I give, it all comes down to the story. Maybe if the story had actually been written passionately about Malaysia's football then it could've made a good impression; critically. Fret not though, next year, we're gonna get Ola Bola! Directed by Chiu Keng Guan, the guy who brought us The Journey! And his pairing up with Astro Shaw again. Yeah! Moneyh! :p
I, with much weariness, give Jejak Warriors a sad 2/5. But I'm not giving up on it just yet. I still feel like I should watch it with my family. Again, Salam and thanks for reading!
I've watched it in the first weekend release and I've already come up with a few pointers for my review. However, you could say it was ego that kept me from writing as I wanted to fill up this blog with a few more different topics before I dwell into movie reviews again; just for my self satisfaction. Oh well, better now or never.
It is as Advertised
I'm, sort of, done with my bashing movie days. That little space of anger is reserved for local movies. From the get-go, Avengers 2 was promoted as a box office hit you cannot miss. So, to expect great engaging storytelling would be silly. Plus, I've been updating myself with recent Marvel comics and seriously, this movie really embodies today's capitalized spectacle of Marvel Comics; setting up premises for multiple characters while showcasing dynamic imagery. Hey, it is what it is and it was fun. It definitely has some effort in story rather than majority of Box Office Spectacles.
Visual Characterization
Unlike the first one, Age of Ultron showcases more of the Avenger's background and interestingly, it was done visually. The character's fears and weakness was shown through hallucinations of the past, present and future; indicating much effort and love for storytelling. Yes, this is the way of directing a box office movie; show don't tell. Better yet, they were shown with basic but essential action-based scenes; of the characters doing and reacting towards their hallucinations and not just talk. I feel like this needs to be justified as a few of reviews I've read lately really didn't understand this. Heck, I'm not even sure if they were real Marvel Fans (Excuse my fanboy rage)
Set Ups
Marvel Cinematic Universe is known for their stingers and set ups for other titles. Believe it or not, it's been 4 years since the first Avengers...wow. And since then, most post Avengers titles didn't lived up to it's hype. Yep, this is the down side of the movie. There were too many set ups and too many characters to juggle. It didn't click into one theme. It felt like it was suppose to be about Artificial Beings who transcends to God-like entities (Ultron and The Vision). But the respective Avenger's screen time really didn't compliment this as much. Obviously, Tony Stark is the main man and his weakness, yet again, sparks the conflict of the story. If it was really Iron Man vs Ultron, the theme may have seemed more bright. But with Hawkeye's family, Black Widow's past, Bruce Banner's insecurities, Thor's responsibilities and Steve Roger's man out of time story...it didn't shine enough. All of these character stories are awesome--with Hulk being my favorite in the movie--but they just didn't focus on the potential theme. Sadly, this also applies to their respective titles with Captain America being most unfaithful to his theme. C'mon, a man out of time sounds like an awesome story!
Cartoon-ish
When the Avengers were in their jet, I was like "Oh, just like in the cartoons"; a subtle hint of what can you expect from the movie. Then, Stark's towers has officially turned to Avenger's tower; officially making the team a brand both in the movie and outside. Then, Ultron's birth from A.I to physical form just confirms it. The movie is cartoon-ish; solving events that questions science and sanity quickly and without grounded explanation. But I understood how The Avengers were never The X-Men; engaging themes that have some significant weight was never their forte. At least, they maintained Hulk's character. It has been a bother for me when the cartoons decides to conveniently make Hulk smart enough to talk and willingly able to change back to Bruce Banner. Hence, why his story was my favorite in the movie.
Other Geeky-moments
The scene at Wakanda was awesome! Not just the fight between Veronica and Hulk but also the awesome set up for Black Panther's home. Yes, this is one build up that sparked excitement. I love the ideology behind Wakanda; a fictional country that answers "What would happen if third world countries was never conquered by the West for their resources?" Wakandan's attire is an awesome visual representation of this ideology; clothes that are untouched by western clothes. But the movie didn't highlight this as much. First, the country looks like any other African countries (Reminded me of Neil Blomkamp's films) and most importantly, there were illegal Vibranium refineries. Vibranium is much sacred and much protected by Wakanda. I do hope they maintain the theme of Black Panther in his movie.
Verdict
The final set up, though seem interesting, didn't excited me as I'm tired of being let down with their movies. Plus, the Maximoff's acting was just terrible and I'm very easy to be satisfied with acting. Avengers Age of Ultron earns an okay 3/5 for it's care towards the characters but falls victim to the box-office demands which I don't think they'll change anytime soon. And that's fine by me. Joss Whedon, you truly are a comic book geek. Thank you.
One of the best things about storytelling is that it invites you to empathize the character or plot; opening up ourselves and recall a similar emotion or predicament. For Papadom 2, directed by Afdlin Shauki, it was one of few local films that managed to make me open up myself; tearing up and being able to put myself in that situation. To be frank though, it was more to the director rather than the fictional characters. That statement has some critical weight to it in both positive and negative ways.
The opening scene is one of the most creative, thought provoking and comedic in recent years of local films (Maybe, the only one). Meant to be the ending of a film that's being filmed in the movie, the opening scene summarize Papadom 2's overall theme while at the same time expresses how the local industry is trying to film such genres. Opening scenes are very important as it establishes the genre, character, style, theme and even a hint of the character's needs. Local films has overlook this and went on to show a general 'explanation' or misleading opening scenes. The best example is the recent local movie, Cicakman 3. The film's opening scene--though I'm confident that wasn't the attention--was a bit, and unnecessarily, homophobic but it did established the villain well.
Commercial value?
While I detest quick cash grabs in films (Even in video games), I cannot deny the importance of audience's reaction. But this is not to be confused with sales and box office. The best stories are the ones that tries to communicate with their audience well; not trying to sugarcoat it or dumb-ing it down. Like a lecturer trying to teach her students, how well the students understand is how much consideration, knowledge, experience and passion is put into her material. Papadom 2 indirectly speaks to the people of the film industry (As what most local films do nowadays). But the center is family in general. Layers in stories compliment each other thus creating solid storytelling. Even though family values are, indeed, general, the film still caters to its critic to the industry. I believe the majority of the audience aren't able to relate to this because--well, they're not filmmakers nor do they ever care to be one in Malaysia (Considering how the masses see local films). This is the reality that I see as the film didn't do well at the box office and it's very disappointing. But this means something more to me, personally.
Great Script
I empathize more towards the director rather than the story itself which is, its in own right, an achievement itself for the film. I'm a film student and Papadom 2 tells the story of Malaysian filmmakers through Saadom's daughter. She's an assistant director to a very angry and nonsensical director. Through her, Saadom merely observes the hustle and bustle of a film set; much like the general audience! But why didn't it made it big in theaters?! Argghhhh!
*Clears throat* Sorry
All of the tiny details of the set; the work ethics, the mentality...all spoke to me very well because it's frightening to me, as a student, to know that I'm going to go through all of this. I believe there's no sugarcoated happy ending when it comes to the film making part but the film ended with what the director felt most important; family. And this is where it hit me, emotionally. Why I empathized more with the director is because I've been following his social network posts and his latest activities at the time. This reflected very well in this movie; sort of diminishing it's fictional nature and encouraging you to self reflect. That's a great achievement in storytelling.
Verdict
Papadom 2 put me into one of those self reflecting moments when one watches films; being in my list of favorite stories like Up, Brave, Legend of Aang, Legend of Korra, Walter Mitty and many more. Local titles are limited but its growing. Papadom 2 earns a solid 4/5 for it's honest storytelling and great script.
Have you read the exclusive fan's first review of Cicakman 3? Click here while it's still fresh!
Social commentary in Malaysian films have been very annoying lately. It seems like it's the only way they can make the film more critical or witty. But when I really think about it though, it's not the extensive use of social commentary that bugs me but, rather, the absence of substance. Terbaik dari Langit does have tons of subtle criticism towards the local film industry but it didn't forget the core essence of storytelling.
Character driven
I can finally say that I remember the character's name from a local movie. The industry still seems oblivious that it's characters that sell. Audiences find it more easy to identify themselves with the characters. Relatable characters are ones that make mistakes for reasons that the audiences can relate to. Berg, Ijam, Toyu and Ali had their own wants and goals; each affecting one another. The plot moves according to their respective individuality and not the writer's 'common sense'. Often times, the local industry writes stories based on cliches; pop culture, trends and common sense. They don't explore the complexity of what the story's substance can be. Redza Minhat, the writer, utilized the story's core; friendship. And with friendship, you have many individuals with respective desire and weaknesses. Sounds very basic but you'd be surprised how often this cannot be done.
Visually daring
Most local films are either undeveloped or shallow (Half ass or terrible is a more harsh way to put it). Terbaik dari Langit is one of few films that's innovative and manage to execute them well. Despite having friendship as it's theme, Nik Amir Mustapha (Director) managed to remind Malaysians that film is a visual medium. Often times, drama is--somewhat--of Malaysia's 'forte' and they are executed with heavy dialogues with uncalled for emotional blunder. Berg's hallucination scenes are tools to describe his point of view. This tool also had a pay-off at the ending; making it full circle and giving it a purpose instead of just simply using it. I also noticed the Hong Kong-esque settings in a few scenes; adding more depths visually.
State of the Malaysian film Industry
The story wittingly uses the plot as a tool to comment on the industry but not too much until it's the theme. Ironic though, the theme also complimented the commentary. Instead of leaving the criticism to mere cynicism, the friendship was the answer. Despite the hardships of the Berg and his friends filming, it's their friendship that matters most. People in the film industry can work as hard as they can but in the end, it's the substance that counts.
Verdict
Did I mentioned that the score and music were awesome? It just brought some familiar emotional ride when one watches a film. But this time, I was watching a local film. I just hope Astro Shaw will continue investing on films like this and give more opportunities to new talents. There's only so much that the current Industry people can do. While they figure out what the youngsters and even people their generation want, give the young people a shot too. Terbaik dari langit earns a 4/5!
Alhamdulillah, local films have been booming lately with promising possibilities for the future. Of course, audience will always compare local content with international ones (Especially with Hollywood) but, if you really look at these films within our country's film history...it's an achievement by itself.
So, this is, sort of, a two part review regarding recent local films. Each exploring local films in terms of Critically and Commercially. As you can see the poster above, I'll be reviewing Cicakman 3!
A franchise that has aged well
....so far
The first thing I noticed when watching through the 2nd act, the storytelling aspect is more mature; really focusing on the character and a theme that they were going for. Through my observation (and limited education in film making), there is a formula for telling a commercial story and it varies according to country, culture, economy, politics and many more. The formula, in a sense, is more or less the same in every country but Cicakman 3 follows Hollywood's narrative structure quite closely. But the story was a very, very, very safe.
Even the directing seems better as the scenes are controlled well; making sure that the mood and emotions of every scenes are apparent, relatable and powerful. The action scenes, however, needed some more work. Most actions were small scaled; no buildings or cities were destroyed. Though, to me, this is fine as long as the story is there but it could have been better if it was implemented in the climax scenes; nothing big...just give it some more stakes.
Yes, even the CGI has been improved. It still has some flaw in making the models and textures more photo realistic. But they finally understand that, like many other aspects of film making, CGI should support the theme and not become the center of attention. There were no gimmicky CGI scenes; scenes that don't rely on elaborate punchlines or an epic spectacle of fighting, explosions and so on.
Westernization
I mentioned that the film followed Hollywood's narrative structure. The decision could have brought better impact as the structure is universal; it's a matter of the story's pace (A very subjective opinion by the way). But Cicakman 3's basic tool for exploring its theme was an ideology that's more familiar in Western countries; having an underdog trope that utilizes symbolism of the human spirit. This is the fundamental ideology of most western movies nowadays. Of course, Malaysia has a firm ideology for itself; that's both unique and familiar with most Asian countries. This is a step backwards as we have our own strong beliefs and film--among many other mediums--is a powerful tool that can showcase it. How to do it? Well, I'm still learning and I think the industry is still learning as well. The Japanese creative industry is a great example for exploring how to express our culture in films. South Korea is also another great example as it's creative industry has been booming in recent years. Their films still have some American box office trope going on but they manage to balance it out with their own culture and ideology.
The Hero
Acting, as always, aren't my forte and I would usually accept whoever is presented (Unless he/she is really terrible). Zizan proves that he's not just a name for KRU Studios to use for gaining publicity. Fizz Fairuz did a swell job portraying the simple villain and Lisa Surihani delivered fairly well.
Kudos to the child actor who delivered a heavy role for a kid. What grabs the audience into the film is definitely the grounded story of family.
Watchable
Ouch, haha. Yes, Malaysians will be harsh with local films and I'm glad to say it's watchable. In fact, it's fairly comprehensive and not painfully shallow as most local films usually produce. The comedy hit its mark very well and the story really sticks inside of you. Funny how I mentioned the franchised has matured when in fact, the new Cicakman is a father. Oops, spoilers.
Westernization
I mentioned that the film followed Hollywood's narrative structure. The decision could have brought better impact as the structure is universal; it's a matter of the story's pace (A very subjective opinion by the way). But Cicakman 3's basic tool for exploring its theme was an ideology that's more familiar in Western countries; having an underdog trope that utilizes symbolism of the human spirit. This is the fundamental ideology of most western movies nowadays. Of course, Malaysia has a firm ideology for itself; that's both unique and familiar with most Asian countries. This is a step backwards as we have our own strong beliefs and film--among many other mediums--is a powerful tool that can showcase it. How to do it? Well, I'm still learning and I think the industry is still learning as well. The Japanese creative industry is a great example for exploring how to express our culture in films. South Korea is also another great example as it's creative industry has been booming in recent years. Their films still have some American box office trope going on but they manage to balance it out with their own culture and ideology.
The Hero
Acting, as always, aren't my forte and I would usually accept whoever is presented (Unless he/she is really terrible). Zizan proves that he's not just a name for KRU Studios to use for gaining publicity. Fizz Fairuz did a swell job portraying the simple villain and Lisa Surihani delivered fairly well.
Kudos to the child actor who delivered a heavy role for a kid. What grabs the audience into the film is definitely the grounded story of family.
Watchable
Ouch, haha. Yes, Malaysians will be harsh with local films and I'm glad to say it's watchable. In fact, it's fairly comprehensive and not painfully shallow as most local films usually produce. The comedy hit its mark very well and the story really sticks inside of you. Funny how I mentioned the franchised has matured when in fact, the new Cicakman is a father. Oops, spoilers.
Verdict
With all honesty, I predict that this will be a box office hit locally. I've seen Malaysians invests themselves on other pathetic and sad content before (Viral videos, dramas, films). Fortunately, Cicakman 3 does not belong in that list. While the story can definitely be more daring, Cicakman 3 showcases promises in the commercial aspect of the film industry; with it's maturity in storytelling, script and direction. I give it a 3.5/5 ! Keep an eye out for the next local film review, Terbaik Dari Langit! This is long over due! Bila kucing enkau sayang tersesat dia Jalanan!!!
My semester break has ended and, as of now, I'm in my second week of studies. Before the hectic life of assignments start, I'd like to finally end my movie frenzy with one more review. Frankly, the frenzy sort of ended when I started playing Watch Dogs! Hahahah! Okay--I'm getting over excited again. The films I've watched were awesome and I didn't planned to review all of them. The priorities were the movies on 2014's must watch list and with a few titles that taught me so much. I've covered The Amazing Spider-Man 2 and Godzilla 2014 (Both of which I watched during the sem break), now it's time to review the main event film of the list.
Relationships
Perhaps, you may have noticed that the poster above isn't in English. Well, I couldn't find an English Poster that really justifies what Days of future Past is all about. It wasn't just about young Charles Xavier and his older self meeting each other. Heck, it wasn't even about Wolverine. It was about the relationships of all characters. Regrettably, I started watching the film from a different point of view; expecting the same exhilarating action analogies that Godzilla gave me. It wasn't until an emotional scene of young Charles with Logan that made me realize my folly. So, from there, I finally enjoyed it with it's offerings. In this installment, Wolverine is finally enjoyable and engaging as I was never fond of his bad ass style from previous films. Anti heroes aren't welcomed as much as justice seeking heroes to me. Days of future past presented Wolverine as an observer; merely watching and guiding as much as he can with the young mutants. He's no longer has that final pun or hit. Young Erik Lehnsherr, whom was my favorite in First Class, was again presented as the violent side of the mutant debate. This time, he was more firm in his beliefs; a lone hunter. It's interesting to see Magneto act alone as he is often portrayed as a boss villain who orders his minions around. Mystique's character centered around the word choice. Although she is seen more violent in this one (As compered to First Class), Raven Darkholme was always put in a situation where she can choose and it played an important part in the final scene. She was in the middle of the debate between Charles and Erik. Finally, my favorite in this installment was Charles Xavier whom was portrayed as a fallen preacher. Again, I've always have a soft spot of this kind of character as I can relate to them more (Haha, perasan!). The professor was emotionally broken after what Erik, Raven and society had done to him. Yes, some say that he chose the right path but yet when you compare him to Erik, you can't help but to understand why people tend to go to the dark side. It seems easier. That's for you to decide.
Mutant and Proud!
Of course, the very substance that kept the story everlasting was the debate of social norms. Again, the scenes of Professor Xavier and Magneto were always critical and emotional. Peter Dinklage as Bolivar Trasks was ingenious. The creator of the mutant hunting Sentinals could easily be portrayed as a one dimensional villain. But giving Peter Dinklage's presence, you can't help but to notice his physical struggle as well. It wasn't as preachy as I've stated it but it was just enough to make you aware. Truly, the actor is breaking the boundaries of acting with his success as a dwarf. Also, I can't help but feel like there's no definitive villain. Finally! This curiosity has been in my mind for awhile. Can you have a good superhero movie if the villains are human as possible? I guess, you can. Yes, Magneto was the villain but I felt for Erik. When he decided to trash the whole city, I face-palmed and said:
"What the hell are you doing, Erik!?"
"Oh my god, you're an asshole!"
Hahaha...I had fun.
Time Travelling
Yes, another genre that's bloody difficult to play around with. Of course, when this film was announced, I can't help but to expect that Days of Future Past would just be a giant reset button. And it was! But in a good way. I didn't realize as I was watching but after reading a few reviews, tons of audience pointed out the continuity issues. What do I think? I'm not bothered by it. However, constructively speaking, such things should have been considered and I'm sure director Bryan Singer put a good thought in it. Also, the scenes of the future seems almost--and I mean ALMOST--boring due to it's role as an exposition of the story. It led to pretty loud and repetitive action with the sentinals. However, the reflection of Michael Fassbender and Ian Mckellen during the action scene was so poetic. All of that violence Erik had done. It took an apocalypse to make him realize his folly.
Verdict
I still regret watching it in a different perspective earlier. If not, I'd probably cry in the theater. Days of future past did not disappoint! If only there's toys for the characters. Why isn't Hasbro or Mattel buying rights from Fox, damn it! I need a Magneto toy! haha! This emotional superhero flick earns a solid 4/5 for justifying that the X-Men are a family of great individuals!
The movie frenzy continues and I think it's time to finish reviewing films in this year's Spoils list since my holidays is at its end. I've already started with Godzilla 2014 which was spectacular. Of course, I did forgot to review Robocop and perhaps I'll get to it soon. For now, I wanna review the film that sort of catalyzed my frenzy towards films; abandoning video games which I always turn to during semester breaks.
Eyes are windows to the soul
Upon watching the trailer, I was concerned that the CGI of Spidey really looked cartoon-ish. Perhaps, it was a good thing because many fans has claimed that this is a design that stays closer to it's source material. I, personally, love it (I even plan on buying the figure!). Spidey actually looks like a teen. What's more impressive is that the suit actor looks more lively; being more expressive with body language unlike Sam Raimi's Spidey. As I watch the film, I turned out to be wrong and Spidey looks just as alive in live action. I love the fact that he's suit wrinkles as he jumps. Some might say that the eyes could make or brake a character's design; considering the fact that most people relies on it for emotional engagement. It sounds like an unfair burden--I know--but they pulled it off with this incarnation of Spidey. For example, Iron Man's eye holes are shaped in a small and narrow holes; mimicking an angry eye. So, when the audience sees this as he is fighting; it syncs as one always associates anger with violence. Spidey's eyes has a balance between angry and emotional as it's narrow on top but continues to be cursive at the bottom. It gives him a more peculiar and engaging attraction. The design from the first Amazing Spidey didn't bothered me as much however when this was released, it made the old one seemed like a Spider-man wannabe.
The Chemistry
I re-watched the first installment of Marc Webb's take a few weeks before the sequel and I'm glad I did. Sometimes, the notion of what an adaptation should be really ruins your experience. You should focus on what a story can be and from there, you can appreciate and learn wonders. Before Spidey, Marc Webb directed 500 days of Summer and upon knowing that, it's obvious that he brought his arsenals from there to this new one. It bothered me that Spidey didn't had much say in the first one; in a way that the character couldn't carry or express himself emotionally without a partner. Spider-Man always narrates his stories in comics and even in Sam Raimi's take. He always have something to say. So, to see him relying so much with Gwen Stacy took us away from his charisma. Then again, Spider-Man is also most famous with his love interests and to see a love story that's realistic brings new perspective of the beloved character. Let's face it, Mary Jane in the old one is a bit of a guy's fantasy. I love how Gwen brings out Peter Parker in a new way. Fortunately, the balance between Spidery's charisma and love interests was satisfying in The Amazing Spidey 2; being able to express himself as the costumed hero we love and as a person. If not for this knowledge, I couldn't have enjoyed it as much because this is the aspect that really pulled me in.
Milking it too much
Unfortunately, it wasn't the best of Spidey and the flaws are big enough to weigh it down. These aren't flaws that's personal but more constructive as you can see clearly a huge franchising attempt here. Sigh, it's Iron Man 2 all over again. It was surprising as they went with a one dimensional villain again; same as the ones on Sam Raimi's. Presenting a quick 360 turn of a normal person turning pure evil without much character developments. I thought they were unwelcome anymore ever since Batman Begins. Electro--although was the best villain for visuals--wasn't the best of villains in terms of story. He felt like a pond in this story which was the only depths I can see fit because the franchise seems to have Oscorp as it's primary villain. The whole Max Dillon being a victim to Oscorp is good enough. Hey, it's better then Sandman 'accidentally' fall into a experiment site and gain powers; 'conveniently' evening the odds with Spidey. Max's motivations were also undeveloped. Harry Osborne was the true villain here and his character was well develop. Although, he seems to much of a wimp to me, Dan Deehan's acting proves why he was cast. He's design, however, seems a bit rushed; combining an exo-suit with a half mutated face. It seemed like they were unsure of how the new Green Goblin would fit in this new franchise. Rhino was just a thug which didn't bothered me as much. The franchising attempt clearly puts in too much information that prohibits the story to be fully develop. I'm not even convinced that a Venom movie would work.
Verdict
All in all, this is a Spider-Man film that I enjoyed very much; having fun with it's humor and action while staying true to it's source material. It's really awesome that they finally use the whole hunting for Spidey's blood plot. Who knows, maybe Scarlet Spider would finally make his cinematic appearance! However, with such a solid premise, I would have big expectations for the next one; to really represent Spider-Man's legacy. Perhaps, like Iron Man 3. This wasn't the main event film of 2014 but I'm having second thoughts. I'm glad it proved me wrong. Thus, I give The Amazing Spider-Man a 4/5.
Salam readers!
The term of re-watching films has a new meaning for me as a film could be entirely different when you watch it again as an adult. Sometimes a film from your childhood is good because of the sentimental value it means to you and not because of the film itself. I cannot deny that I myself always yearn for childhood reminiscence but this predicament has lead me to be more encouraged when it comes to re-watching films; to appreciate it in a different perspective represented within the story. To be frank though, what lead me to re-watch Roland Emmerich's take on the Kaiju is my newly found fandom of Godzilla. Another reason is to learn and boy did I learn a lot of things while watching this. Thus let's move on the review.
Man vs Mankind's ego
Being mutual brings a lot of good things; teaching you the bigger picture of the problem. Admittedly, I kept comparing it to Gareth Edward's Godzilla. Make no mistake, I'll compare it nonetheless because it's suppose to be an adaptation. But in this section, I'll try to appreciate it as it is. As a stand alone film (As in without the Godzilla's legacy weighing it down), it doesn't take itself seriously. Of course, the premise is mankind versus monster but the character developments and silly humor wasn't engaging. The beginning of the film really pulled me in; showcasing that old 90's film feel. It all went away when Zilla (A rename given by Toho since their copyrights with sony had expired) comes into the picture because the way that the characters react to it was so unrealistic. The only character that felt real was Kevin Dunn as the Colonel. Everyone else didn't take the disaster seriously and to make matters worst, we're presented with a love story that's just ridiculous. The politicians in this film are portrayed as if the city is run by a 16 year old. Was it suppose to be a social commentary for politicians? Dr. Niko Tatopoulous , played by Matthew Broderick, felt like a zombie; making no expressions or reactions of what a sane man would do in such predicament. He was there as a coincidence; no analogies, no strong relationships, no social commentary. He was there for the sake of being there! In this incarnation, Zilla is a product of a nuclear explosion and throughout the story, he was presented as a threat to the extinction of human species. However, it didn't felt like humans versus an apex predator. Mankind was represented with the worst kind of people. I wanted mankind to loose. During the death scene of Zilla, suddenly we're shown that Dr.Niko sympathizes Zilla. Where on earth did that come from? There were no establishment of the character's caring nature towards the creature. Either that or I couldn't tell it by his face. This flick feels more like Man vs their ego. Hear me out, Zilla exist because of those nuclear bomb tests and now they want to destroy it. Jean Reno's character, Philippe' Roachee, was from French secret service. Instead of preventing or taking responsibility of Zilla, the French tackles the situation secretly; failing to gain information of the creature's habitat prior to the Manhattan attack. It was even established that they knew long before the United States did. And Dr. Niko's speech of human extinction seems narcissistic. There you go, man and their ego.
Using the Godzilla's name
This is an adaptation and I try to be open minded; venturing into the director's perspective of the literature. But this isn't a different perspective of Godzilla. It's basically Jurassic Park. How do you expect me to accept it as it is when the story itself is weak. I have to give credits that it did--in a way-- follow the plot of the first Godzilla film in 1954; only the plot and not the substance. What's amazing about Godzilla is that he has character even though he's a non-talking giant lizard. This could just be a spin-off of Jurassic Park and would still work. The whole giant monster feel was almost diminish when the human characters were chased by baby Zillas; straight away taking us away from the basic premise and into a new one. How was it there were baby Zillas? Were there two Zillas? The Zilla reproduced Asexually...
...WHAT?!
REALLY?!
Sure! Why not?! For the sake of the plot, it's a he that reproduces asexually by laying freaking eggs! That fact is obviously a sad plot device just to give a little more action and that's not a good thing.
The design
But I can't deny the good design of the creature. It's pretty smart that the sleek and thin design was used in Zilla's arsenal; enabling him to move quicker in the city. The design also gave it a more dangerous looks with it's long neck and thicker jaw line. That's the only positive thing I can give. Job well done to the designer.
Verdict
There's only one good thing I'd gain from this flick and it's that I learn a few pointers in storytelling; especially if it's a disaster movie because I have no knowledge in writing such genre. To conclude, I give Zilla a harsh 2/5 for reasons mentioned above.
This is the first local movie review of 2014. Sadly, I don't watch a lot of local films newly released. It's not just because of the constant disappointment that it brings, it's more to my lack of discipline of going to theaters. I only make time for my list and, even so, I still missed a few. While I try to stay consistent in supporting local films, let's review another installment of Mamat Khalid's Zombi franchise.
I'm having a blast with my movie marathon and while there are plenty of awesome movies, there's also a fair share of horrible ones as well. While my previous reviews of films are very positive, this is one of few bad ones. I feel sort of bad starting it with Zombi Kilang Biskut.
No Plot
Don't get me wrong, I love Mamat Khalid's films. He's constant subtexts of social commentary in Malaysia are always fun. As I watched this film, it made me longing for Man Laksa and Rock oo; genres that are much more suited for his style. I also enjoyed Hantu Kak Limah Balik Rumah which was a surprise to me. I try to give sympathy for Zombi Kilang Biskut but I just can't. It had no freaking plot. Trust me, I looked for it! It had this superhero trope-like story of having two ghosts (Equivalent to having two villains)? What? The Pontianak (Female Vampire) and hoards of zombies was a terrible idea in terms of plot. The Pontianak had this horror suspense story going on while the zombies carried the survival horror feel. It was confusing. It felt like they had no idea what they're writing about. One might say that it's comedy so give it a break. No! The genre and plot should help the humor; giving a more strong feel when one watches a film. What made it worse was the very lazy franchising attempt at the end. Yes, all Zombi films end with a cliffhanger but at least, it had a strong enough ending. In Zombi Kilang Biskut, I was just confused, speechless and disappointed. I never liked a hint of the sequel's plot and to face one that's just lazy is a whole different level.
Parody of Malaysians
Perhaps, this is the main reason why I would watch it. I immensely enjoyed Rock with it's never before seen story of highlighting Malaysian Pop Culture. Here in this film, the subtexts were still there. They were presented with a few funny scenes. I enjoyed it. It add the humor even more. But it lacks a bigger picture; of what specific topic that it's trying to tackle. No doubt, it was due to the inconsistent genre as it's premise.
Verdict
I recommend to watch this with your family as I find it to be more funny to laugh in a group. However, unlike my family, I didn't enjoyed it as much as they did. I give Zombi Kilang Biskut a disappointing 2.5/5.
Here's hoping for better days, Salam and thanks for reading!
How convenient it is that most awesome movies are released now that I'm in my holidays. This particular one is in my list of must see films and I must say...it. Was. Incredible!
I definitely grew up watching Kaiju shows which mostly consists of the Ultraman franchise. However, I'm not at all familiar with Godzilla; of what he's legacy stands for. Heck, it boggles my mind as to how does a monster versus monster story could be ever so popular. Obviously, this is an influence from Ultraman; seeing that at least the hero has more flexibility within the costume. The limited movement of the Kaiju's suit really leaves not much room for variety in fighting. Fortunately, Gareth Edwards take on this one sucked me in so deep; I've automatically proclaim myself a legitimate Kaiju fanatic...to a certain extent, of course. Thus, let's continue to the review.
Force of nature!
It's surprising that there were efforts in telling a story because the overall premise, at first glance, seems to demand another explosive popcorn flick. Unfortunately, it did produced negative opinions which I totally disagree based on their illiterate perspectives. This is the flare of passion that drives me to write this as most fails to see what Godzilla actually is in this film. From a perspective, this is a disaster film; Godzilla and the Mutos are representation of Tsunamis, earthquakes, hurricanes and so on. Mankind can only bear witness this monstrosity and save themselves. That is how the Kaijus and man is portrayed; series of search and rescue missions while Godzilla goes hunting. That's it. It's also very intriguing that the Mutos are portrayed as a mother and her offspring; highlighting that we're just witnessing one of nature's beautiful event. It's like watching Sea Turtles laying eggs but mankind is in it's way. It's amazing that if you look at it at a different perspective, mankind and Godzilla are actually the villains who disrupts the phenomenon. Godzilla is nothing more than a hunter but yet we're left with so many questions of his habitat. Why did he hunt the Mutos? Like them, he eats radiation. From here, you're venturing in the thoughts of a zoologist; yearning to learn more of this creature's secret.
Mankind's journey
To consider the negative thoughts of that there weren't much of Godzilla in the film, it's understandable that the human characters aren't as appealing. Aaron Taylor-Johnson (whom played as Lieutenant Ford Brody) didn't meet up to the bars that Bryan Cranston (played as his father, Scientist Joe Brody) created. His character was softly written to reflect how mankind is affected; not presented in an obvious or preachy manner. Sadly, Aaron couldn't really deliver as much as the fans wanted because people nowadays really invests themselves with character developments in films. It's a shame that Bryan Cranston's character died because it seemed that he was the spark of the movie though it is understandable to why he had to go. Scientist's Joe Brody's death represents a legacy that his father left for his son; a problem or a solution. It's up to you to decide although I thought of it as a problem at first. Then I love how Ford Brody ventures on and meets people that represents the drastic effect of the disaster had done. The public whom are reflected as a lost boy in a train; painting that innocence feeling to the audience. Then Brody ventures on to the military, as he is a Lieutenant himself, and discovers the demands and burden that those people had to go. It reminded me of the state of economy; always ever changing and demands so much from the people whom are involved. This film had it's fair share of awesome quotes and this one describe this theme very well.
"I guess we're monster hunters now"
-Sergeant Tre Morales-
The Brody family is also a, somewhat, easy way to engage with the audience; associating by putting themselves in the situation. Instead of having man versus monster, the final fight had the soldiers trying to diffuse a nuclear bomb while Godzilla faces the Mutos; letting nature takes it course and stopping it is futile as it only creates more problems. They're fixing their own mistake. Indeed, the human aspect of the story is detailed but softly written.
Painting the canvas
This is the layer that makes both Godzilla and the film itself all the more unique. How do you give character to an animal? This is no cartoon where it can talk or have more humanly expression. It's the same principal that I've noticed while watching WWE. To really sell a wrestler, he/she needs charisma; having a unique way to communicate with the audience. Somewhere along the way, some wrestlers--most of them being big power house--don't have that natural ability. So, what do you do? They usually give these monsters managers to talk for them. Like Paul Heyman to Brock Lesnar (Whom I really hate right now!) or Paul Bearer to Undertaker, Dr. Ishiro Serizawa speaks for Godzilla. Ken Watanabe's character speaks of his scientific findings and of the mythology; giving the audience an idea of who Godzilla is. Godzilla brings balance to world. How do we know that? We don't. It's a perspective to consider and that makes the story wider in subtext. He even has the best line of the movie.
Admiral William "This alpha predator of yours, doctor, do you really think he has a chance?"
Dr. Ishiro "The arrogance of men is thinking nature is in their control and not the other way around"
"Let them fight"
Another argument is the lack of action from Godzilla and I appreciate it due to the perspectives that's shown. But to consider the action part of it though, I was freaking excited in the final battle. Final battles in movies are often not engaging as we tend to get ahead of the story. Gareth Edwards somehow created a hype to this battle; teasing us with brief conflicts between Kaijus. And when we finally see it, we get all pump up! I was going crazy when Godzilla actually had fire breath! Oh man, I so wanna buy a Godzilla toy!
Verdict
Ratings are just numbers and the true benefit from watching films is to imagine and learn many things. While I would suggest previous movies which are Captain Philips and Gravity, Godzilla is not the kind I would recommend for everyone. I must admit, it's not universal. That's the fairest thing I can say. To conclude, I give Godzilla a solid 5/5! The last film had this rating was Walter Mitty and Toy Story 3! The simple representation of humanity really shows the dedication in storytelling but it's the mythology of Godzilla and his force of nature that captured my imagination and passion. Now, I'm wondering if I should review Godzilla 1998.
Thanks and Salam readers!
A lot of people--well, to be specific, people in my social circles--said that this is great. I couldn't get away from hearing this film; as if fate is telling me to watch it. I watched an interview of popular directors and Alfonso Cuaron was in it. I was in love with Guillermo Del Toro--especially his recent film-- and what do you know, he was best friends with Alfonso Cuaron. Heck, I even had to watch one of his earlier films in class. Then it won Golden Globe Awards for best director. After months of these hypes, I finally give it a try.
Mankind's beginnings
Let me just start by stating that if you aren't into visual storytelling in films, then you won't enjoy this movie to its fullest. The art form is something you have to learn and I'm confident not all audience are well equip with it. The plot is pretty straight forward; not many dialogues or elaborated character developments. No, it wasn't ignored. It was heavily and beautifully crafted within the cinematography. It was unbelievably engaging as the scenes were shot as if the camera itself was floating in space; highlighting that there's no way up or down. That's freaking scary; acknowledging that such simple law of physic is very important on how we perceive life. The first person perspectives were also incredible; again emphasizing the gravity. It felt like I was playing a video game..haha. It reminded me of Dead Space 3. The visual representation was also amazing and fits the vast and empty space premise beautifully. I chose the poster above because it showcases one of most apparent visual story within. In this scene, she was almost ran out of oxygen and struggles to get into the shuttle. She then strips off from her space suit; panting and in a rush. Then Sandra Bullock curled up; mimicking a fetus. It's really cool how the props were composed to highlight this scene. I felt the seconds of heavenly peace she felt. To further the visual story, the final scene continues it as the protagonists struggles to swim out of the water when she finally landed on earth. It felt good to finally see land, sea and grass. The struggle highlights evolution; of the first fish to swim to shore. I don't believe in Darwinism but I appreciate the substance crafted within the visuals. The birth of mankind theme associated with the infinite possibilities of space really makes you feel tiny.
Another survival plot
This is the third survival movie I've watched in a row. Wow. As I've stated in previous reviews regarding the plot tropes, character developments aren't elaborated as other genres. I believe this genre relies on analogies on the actions and visuals. Thus leading me to emphasize more that you can't enjoy this film to it's max without such notions. Yes, the acting was superb, no doubt, but the writing wasn't elaborated. It's very wonderful that this film really utilizes the visuals; making it a delightful experience.
Verdict
Gravity took me away from this world; travelling to a black hole of beauty, curiosity and fear. After all, people are afraid of things they do not understand. Again, this is a movie I recommend to everyone and I urge you to acquire some understanding of visual storytelling for a better experience. I give Gravity a 4/5.
Frankly speaking, this kind of films can never go wrong for me. I must admit, my constant hunger for outrages fiction left me ill-equip in knowledge of critically commenting these films. Nonetheless, I ridiculously enjoyed Captain Phillips and heck, Tom Hanks is my favorite actor! Though I'm not familiar with Paul Greengrass's films, this one might just pull me in.
The danger is real
I knew that this film was based on a true story but I didn't bothered to research what happened. So, I watched this film with little knowledge of what to expect. Right from the start, I notice the heavy hand held shots; catching me off guard. The close ups of Captain Richard Phillips and his wife bothered me as I didn't have a clearer view of them. The story's perspective then widens as we are shown the lives of the Somalian Pirates. The Captain then continues to check his ship's crew and quarters; leaving everything in check. It can't help but to remind me of Assassin's Creed Black Flag..haha. Some might ask "When are the pirates are going to come?" and that, to me, it's a bad thing. Getting ahead of a film not only almost ruins the movie experience but is also quite annoying. The early hand held shots of both the Pirates and Captain's lives are very essential because when the conflict finally arrives, the dangers felt really real. This is an aspect of the film that I really admire; the dedication of highlighting the danger. I can imagine this film without the handheld shots and it wouldn't be as engaging.
At the edge of my seat
This is a survival genre; focusing on one unfortunate event. So, the character developments aren't as apparent as the superhero genre that I'm used to. I know this though I didn't thought of it as I was watching. The character Captain Phillips wasn't exactly unique and I guess that's not the point of the story. Tom Hanks acting, playing a responsible and quick witted Captain, was all so awesome. Somehow, I feel the weight that the character had to carry. Every risky games that the Captain and crew played kept me excited. Man, I don't feel like this often when I'm watching films. Barkhad Abdi, who played the leader of the four pirates, was not dangerous. No, I didn't felt like his character was dangerous. This is not a bad thing, though. The Pirates whom captured the captain weren't professionals and you can see that throughout. I just felt angry and annoyed not at the acting but at the characters. I hated them...in a good way. Automatically that should prove the effectiveness of their acting.
Based on a true story
In the final scene where the doctors was checking on the Captain. Oh my god, it was just so emotional. He was focused, smart and sometimes tired. But at the end of the film, we see that he's just a normal person; breaking down emotionally from the horrors of the pirates. Man, Tom Hanks is such a good actor.
Verdict
Although I did enjoyed the film immensely, my lack of notion in this genre does effect the overall rating. It is just a number after all and I would recommend anybody to watch this. I give Captain Phillips a 4/5 for the awe inspiring acting of Tom Hanks, Barkhad Abdi and the rest of the cast. Plus, an admirable effort in highlighting the realism.
As of late, I realized that the movie reviews I've been watching are mostly one dimensional; stating what they saw literally and giving none critical comments. This realization started after I watched The Amazing Spider-man 2. It annoyed me like crazy. It bothered me as they didn't consider the auteur theory, writing style, chemistry in acting and so many more. It pisses me off. So, I could complain all day long but it's generally not productive. Thus I decided to find other sources of reviews and at the same time, I try to review more intellectually; considering the art, commercial value and perspective of the audience. I really do hope that this review is constructive as possible. Salam and thanks for reading!
Oh yes, I've ignored this blog yet again! And I can't even remember when and why I forgot. It's semester break again (The only time when I really remember this blog) and so, yet again, I've decided to update it. This time I'm a little bit ambitious; setting a goal of when and what to write for weeks to come. Since my new year's movie reviews kept me disciplined enough; I'll follow the basic guidelines of what I did then. I'll write one to three movie reviews then ending with an article label under 'Inspiration'. I'm in my movie frenzy zone; abandoning video games for the moment just to make room for my brain to critically process the films I've watched. I'm such in a good mood that it causes me to think more actively on films. It's been a long time since I felt this way.
Moving on to the actual review, After Earth caught my attention as I was watching a harsh review of it. I didn't finish watching it though as the review hyped me enough to watch this Syfy flick for myself. Despite the overwhelming negative comments, I do have some amount of sympathy towards it. Heck, that's why I chose the poster above because the line "Danger is real, fear is a choice" was the best aspect of the film.
Fatherhood
This theme always get to me. It's very relatable thus leading me to forget my critical comments. It's safe to say that this is one of the strength of the story; complimenting the above tag line just enough. I've recently been personally attracted to the concept of chemistry in storytelling--more on the writing aspect--and Will Smith and his son's relationship did interest me. However, Will Smith carried all the burden of the relationship and even the story itself; giving a strong performance that made it all bearable. Unfortunately, he wasn't the hero.
Bad acting
Jaden Smith played the son of a legendary general within the story's universe. It's funny because that's what he, sort of, actually is; receiving big expectations from audiences as he is grows older. Jaden's emotional performances with his father was superb as it is a familiar theme. But it is the massive science fiction background that weigh him down...hard. He's suppose to have this accent that's unique to the story but it was inconsistent; especially in those strong emotional scenes. The story, to my surprise, is actually a survival genre; focusing on one event of a character's life. This leaves not much room for character development in terms of dialogues, events and other character interactions. All of that is executed in forms of action which can act as metaphors. Jaden Smith was definitely unfamiliar with the premise and sadly, it affected the overall movie. Perhaps, if his father was the main actor, things could get better?
Undeveloped Universe
This time, I did some background research of the production and I've seen a few aspects that affected the outcome. Well, at least to me. Will Smith was the producer and he pitched the story in the first place. From the beginning, the movie was meant to push Jaden to stardom or, at least, to help his own son. So, there's this fairly good premise of mankind moving on to another planet, an interpretation of fear as a ruthless alien together with a grounded story of fatherhood; sounds promising, doesn't it? I couldn't agree more that even a huge spectacle needs a grounded theme. The problem is that the premise wasn't carefully thought off; leaving so many undeveloped concepts. There was also this oddly put jump scare...what the heck?
Verdict
In summary, the movie wasn't that bad. Maybe, I'm being generous but this is just what I think. However, I wouldn't be watching or even thinking about it in the next few months. It's incredibly slow for a one hour and forty minute movie. So, I give After Earth a 2.5/5 for an awesome tag line that's fairy highlighted through fatherhood. But the bad acting and directing just weigh it down too much.
Post number four and the final movie review for my new years post marathon! This is one of two science fiction films that I've invested my time on this year. Unlike the other, Star Trek: Into Darkness, this film wasn't listed on my 'must watch' films list. I've saved the best for last for this post marathon. Elysium not only made me a definite fan of director Neill Blomkamp (As the poster suggests, the director of my Sy-fy favorite), it has made me reflect myself as a film student as well.
Upon learning the technicalities and arts of film making, I can't help but to reflect myself with infamous directors of the art cinema Names such as Woody Allen and Jean-Luc Godard are often mentioned; to encourages us to make more artistic films. Yes, I admit that I'm imagining these problems in my head; thinking that someone or the public is pushing me to be an artistic filmmaker. I just can't help myself to think about these possibilities. The best that I can make out of it is self discovery; learning what I want specifically. What sort of filmmaker I want to be? Well, the reason lies on two things. I'm a geek and I'm a Muslim. So, moving on the review of this epic Science fiction, this film helped me discover that inner geek within me.
The visuals
While I feel that this film tackles a theme that's dangerously close to being cliche, the visuals are definitely admirable efforts of taking the genre to the next level. The feel of realism is elevated with handheld camera shots and I believe that's no easy task with massive amount of CGI. Not to mention the action sequence that really puts you on the edge of your seat. I'm no easy person to get hyped for action scene; the explosions and choreographed fights are just digested with almost no amount of enthusiasm. No, I don't hate it. It's just that I have a hard time to get excited about it. But that's all different with the action sequence in Elysium. I was especially excited during the kidnap scene.
The settings
It seems familiar; the whole dirty and corrupted world of Elysium and it doesn't helps when I'm now a fan of Dredd (Seeing much similarities with both film's settings). While I have no problem of seeing the same theme being tackled, I sense that this one doesn't tries to go beyond the tropes that most Sy-fy films go for. I can't deny that I have a big problem of engaging with Sy-fy films (Which is why I'm trying to dwell into it more) and perhaps this neglect is a major factor for my sense of dissatisfaction of Elysium's world. Sadly, this does affect the rating of this film; that instant feel I had when I left the cinema.
The dedication
Comes the part where self reflecting emerges out of me ever so strongly. I know I'm a geek but yet I'm confident that telling stories for the sake of commercialization wouldn't be satisfying. For a brief and scary moment, I see no solution. It's either I'm a geek, telling commercialized superhero stories, or an 'artist' who tells incomprehensible personal views of life (Oh my god, so deep). Seeing Blomkamp realizing his vision is definitely an eye opener and just plain awesome. I can't help but to compare him with J.J Abrams and especially with his latest film. I can see the dedication of Blomkamp using the genre of Sy-fy to express his views of the world. While I appreciate Abram's respect to satisfy the Trekkies and the franchise's universe itself, I take Blomkamp's work more personally; reflecting and assuring myself that it is possible and better yet, appreciated.
The story uses the high possibilities of how races and language can diversify the people of earth; most Hispanics are victims of a dying earth while Caucasians are living with the best health care in a space station named Elysium. In fact, this is a reflection of today's reality. The themes of races, medical care and politics are developed very well. I say, even more than the characters themselves. I guess this is an example of a film that focuses more on the story's settings rather than the character developments. Hmm, maybe that's another big reason why I couldn't indulge this film in full due to my taste of preferring characters. However, the theme's developments here are highly appreciated. The ending made me say to myself "This is Blomkamp's trademark" and if you've already seen District 9, I guess you can figure it out. The ending is also a strong attempt of making the themes of this story more apparent which made all of my conclusion of commending this film not commercialize worthy diminish. I knew then what sort film this is.
The verdict
I had my doubts during most of the time while I was watching this film and I regret it. It had cause me and I couldn't engage with the story to the max. After a long time of thinking it over, Elysium is a movie that's admirable with its almost altruistic ambitions with the story. This is a rating I gave after walking out of the cinema which differs from now (Which is higher). So, I give Neill Blomkamp's Elysium a strong 3.5/5.
