![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
April 24th
Rio
I've actually seen this twice now. It's a fun kids' movie, predictable but sweet. The voice talent is great - Jesse Eisenberg is adorable even as a bird, and Jemaine Clement really brings it for the adult. His evil cockatoo is brilliant. There are a lot of cute little sight gags that go over kids' heads, and lots of nice side characters for the kids to like. While it doesn't totally brush over the darker side of Rio de Janeiro, it's pretty Disneyfied. It looks good, not great.
3 out of 5
The 39 Steps
From Hitchcock's British film era, the copy I saw of this one was pretty terrible quality. It would probably have been more enjoyable to watch had the quality been better - there was constant white noise, and the stock was grainy. It was pretty standard Hitchcock stuff - ordinary guy in over his head (although the set-up for his knowing too much was really abrupt and pretty hard to swallow), originally icy blond (actually more fiery, I think, and was very intersting until she got a random personality transplant and got boring), MacGuffin that doesn't really matter. There are come cute conceits and a few fun scenes.
3 out of 5
April 25th
Nine Queens
As I have mentioned before, I love a good heist. I also love a good con movie. This is a pretty great con movie. It's Argentinian, and it's got great characters and an awesome twisty con. The pacing is good, and it's shot with a lot of style and urgency. Ricardo Darin puts in an absolute cracker of a performance as a career con man with a fucked up view of the world. Definitely a worthwhile watch.
4 out of 5
Elizabeth
Looks great, good actors, but I really don't get it. It was too melodramatic for me, and all the editing was over the top. I mean, obviously Cate Blanchett is a marvelous pale-skinned goddess, and this was a breakout role for her, so props on that front. The era was depicted beautifully. I just prefer more understatement and less hysteria, I guess. I found it a chore to get through the movie.
3.5 out of 5
Thor
OKAY DID ANYONE ELSE THINK "ISENGARD" INSTEAD OF "ASGARD" EVERY TIME THEY SAID IT?
The problem with this movie is, basically, that it isn't Thor's movie. It's Loki's. Tom Hiddleston, who I've never seen in anything before in my life, puts in a fantastic performance as the film's highly relatable villain and the only actually character in the film. Everyone else feels like a cardboard cut-out, albeit pretty and stylish cardboard cut-outs. The split focus between
2.5 out of 5
Scream 4
I love the original and I was expecting this to be pretty bad, what with it being so long since the last Scream movie, but I was actually pleasantly surprised. The killer was suitably shocking, I actually cared about a couple of the new characters (I don't like her, but Hayden Panettiere does a good job), and it was just more fun than I thought it would be. They spend most of the movie going on about how all the rules have changed, and then basically upend everything by not changing any of the rules at all. I also miss Neve Campbell a little bit - she's pretty fierce in this one, and looking fantastic. I'm not saying that this is groundbreaking like the original, but at least it's fun and has a couple of genuine old-school slasher flick scares (though most deaths could be more creative).
3 out of 5
Green Queen
Tags:
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
From:
no subject
From:
no subject