Reviews by SJMJ91

Someone please tell me what the purpose was to remake such a classic! In a way, I felt this way going into the cinema but the reason why I saw it was because I wanted to see what it was like seeing as I love the original and to compare them together. Not only was it one of the biggest pieces of crap that I have seen in a long time but it was something that I just laughed at because of how pathetic it was! Despite it having better effects than the original and having seeing the original I knew what was going to happen, there wasn't just any suspenseful moments where I was scared at all.


Well, the acting was the worst thing about so-called "Nightmare On Elm Street"! The entire cast might as well shit on Wes Craven and Robert Englund's laps while they're at it! I had started to like Jackie Earle Haley as an actor like his great performance in Watchmen and he seemed like he was going to be a good Freddy Krueger from the trailer but he was TOTALLY miscast for Freddy! I know that Freddy is quite a hard character to play but he needed to be scary and he didn't need to be annoying which unfortunately turned out to be what Haley was like. Englund was a lot scarier and he made Freddy like a really scary, sinister psycho but Haley made him look like a zombie! His voice was a real pain in the arse too. I bet that Rooney Mara, Kyle Gallner and Katie Cassidy who played Nancy, Quentin and Kris aren't even professional actors. They're probably amateurs.


Samuel Bayer, are you fucking mad?! Thinking you was able to make the remake better than the original? Uhh… don't think so!! It was badly filmed with a boring pace that I personally feel didn't have any traditional suspense to it at all! To be honest, it is quite typical that Michael Bay has produced it seeing as he hasn't been in the good books of cinema at the moment with his mega disappointing film Transformers 2: Revenge Of The Fallen. Michael Bay tries too hard and it backfires every time!


Overall, A Nightmare On Elm Street is an absolutely appalling, boring, chaotic disaster that was laughably awful and couldn't have gone any worse! Even the effects didn't save this film! If this doesn't win the Razzie for worst remake/sequel or even Worst Picture, I'll be majorly pissed off! Goddamn you Bayer, Bay and Haley!!

To be honest, I had no idea of what to expect from this film except perhaps a fine performance from Meryl Streep. I really liked Julie & Julia when I saw it! It is a very inspiring, heart-warming film that will delight all hearts who watch it! It is quite a special film because there aren't that many films based on cooking because there aren't many true stories that would be good for a film. Plus, it'll be hard to make a fictional story about cooking. It worked well with Julie & Julia but worked even better with the Pixar animated film Ratatouille. The food looked lovely in the film but the film itself as well as the food consumed you with its charm and beauty.


Julie & Julia tells two stories set in two different generations. The first being set in the 1950s with Julia Child when she is learning French cooking which is the time she achieves a breakthrough in her cooking career. The second story is set in 2002 of a young writer called Julie Powell. She is bored with her career and lives with her husband Eric. To make her life a bit easier and enlighten it, she decides to make an attempt at cooking all 524 recipes in Julia Child's cookbook "Mastering The Arts Of French Cooking" in a year. Over the years, Meryl Streep has proven herself to be one of the greatest actresses of all time and her performance as Julia Child is a performance that in my opinion should have earned her third and long overdue Oscar! Streep was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Leading Actress for her performance but lost to Sandra Bullock in The Blind Side. However, she did win the Best Actress Musical/Comedy Golden Globe Award over Sandra Bullock, Marion Cotillard, Julia Roberts as well as a second nomination for herself. Amy Adams was amazing in this film too! It is her second film with Meryl Streep and despite that they don't appear in a single scene together, the chemistry is awesome and there is this inspiring feeling that the audience feel towards both. To be honest, despite Meryl Streep's role is classed as the leading role and Amy Adams's role is classed as supporting; I personally think that the film is more about Julie Powell than Julia Child.


Out of the films that I have heard that director Nora Ephron has done (mostly comedy-dramas), Julie & Julia seems quite typical of Ephron to make. After seeing Julie & Julia, my enthusiasm to watch more films from Nora Ephron has woken up and I intend to watch some more from her especially When Harry Met Sally, Silkwood and Sleepless In Seattle. As far as filming of Julie & Julia is concerned, it seemed like a very hard film to make because it is one film set in two completely different generations as well as two different cities of the world: New York and Paris and needing different backgrounds and different actors from the specific places.


Overall, Julie & Julia is a really good entertaining film based on a theme that we don't see very often. It is perhaps one of the most inspiring films that I have watched in a while. It doesn't quite reach my list of the best films of 2009 but it isn't far off. Damn you, Academy that Meryl Streep didn't win her 3rd Oscar! Best Meryl Streep performance in a long time!

Iron Man 2 was something I couldn't wait for but was a bit worried about as well. The reasons why I was worried was because there were a lot of superhero characters involved and that there could be too many stories going on at the same time and would be too much. This kind of thing happened with X-Men III: The Last Stand and Spider-Man 3 but thankfully it didn't with Iron Man 2. The film surpassed the hype and it turned out to be something that I really enjoyed. I am not sure which of the two I liked more but I can say they are both awesome films that I enjoyed equally.


Iron Man 2 begins 6 months after the end of the first Iron Man film where Tony Stark looks like he’s having the time of his life, but secretly he’s starting to crack from the strain of a mysterious malady. Meanwhile, deranged Russian Ivan Vanko is plotting to annihilate Tony, in the guise of super-villain Whiplash. Iron Man 2 had the better cast and a wider range of characters than the first film! Robert Downey Jr. Makes another triumph return as Tony Stark/Iron Man and proves once again that Stark is his character! Stark's life goes a bit downfall not only because he's Iron Man but also his relationship with Pepper Potts as well. Don Cheadle replaces Terrence Howard as Lt. Col. James 'Rhodey' Rhodes who is a good friend of Stark and becomes like another Iron Man known as War Machine. Gwyneth Paltrow in my opinion totally miscast for both Iron Man films! Unfortunately, her acting was poor and quite soppy. We all knew after the first film that she has feelings for Stark but unfortunately Paltrow didn't show that emotion like I was expecting. Mickey Rourke was FANTASTIC as Ivan Vanko! Rourke suited that character almost perfectly because he was that evil, scheming and pretty damn cool type. One thing, though: Ivan Vanko/Whiplash wasn't involved in the film that much, really. Scarlett Johansson was good as Natalie Rushman/Natasha Romanoff/Black Widow but unfortunately the character wasn't developed enough to get into. I think they could have improvised well if War Machine/James Rhodes wasn't in it but he is a major character to Iron Man. Sam Rockwell was awesome as Justin Hammer because he made Justin seem a pretty serious character but a bit of an idiot at the same time!


Jon Favreau is a director who I am really taking a strong liking to as of late because every time he has released a film, I have been totally entertained! He gave us Zathura and then most notably the first Iron Man. He returns to make a very entertaining sequel that only just managed to not turn out like Spider-Man 3 or X-Men 3: an absolutely chaotic story but with entertaining action! The script was a bit soppy in some scenes of the film but to be honest that is quite typical of a film like this.


Overall, Iron Man 2 is a very entertaining film that I really enjoyed. It may have had a better cast in the sequel than the first film but I thought that the first film had the better plot hence why I think that one is better than the sequel. Other than that, a great start to summer blockbusters 2010.

I had very high expectations for the next Coen Brothers film after their great success with No Country For Old Men and then another great follow-up Burn After Reading but when I watched A Serious Man, I found it to be one of the most disappointing films that I have watched in a while. To be honest, I don't fully know how to explain what my overall thoughts were of the film but the best thing I can say is that the plot became a confusing and chaotic mess and didn't really make any sense as the story carried on and because of this, the plot went flat and when it suddenly ended, I was like "Right… what the f***?" To be honest, I think the only thing that was good in this film was the script from the Coen's and the great performance from Michael Stuhlbarg.


A Serious Man is set in 1967 and tells the story of a Jewish college physics professor called Larry Gopnik (Stuhlbarg) who lives with his family in suburbs of Minneapolis, Minesota. His life is a nightmare during the film as his son Danny secretly smokes marijuana, his daughter Sarah is stealing money from him to get a nose job, his brother Arthur (Kind) has been staying on their couch for months and his wife wants a divorce and a gett so she can be with family friend and widower Sy Ableman. Michael Stuhlbarg's performance as Larry Gopnik was really good! When hard events occur in Larry's life, there are some moments where people would laugh but the film would darkly show its comedy in this sense but I thought there was nothing funny about it but at the same time, I thought there was nothing emotional about it either. I mean, I did like the character to start off with but unfortunately the film was too flat for me to like the character even more as it went on. Richard Kind's performance as Arthur Gopnik was even better than Michael Stuhlbarg's was. Kind was barely in any scenes at the beginning but midway through the film until the end, he was a powerful and effective character who became more important in the film than Larry did.


Like every single film the Coen's have done, they are just totally random with random stories, characters but very similar writing styles except one or two they have done before (No Country For Old Men, for example). The Coen's failed to make this one exciting like they did with their previous two films and I began to feel less and less bothered about what was going to happen. Seeing as the film is a black comedy and I realize that it isn't always a laugh-out-loud comedy with simple humor but I was open minded when watching this film and there was not one moment where I'd chuckle. There wasn't even anything humorous in the story, characters or anything! On the bright side of things, there's no doubt that the Coen's are some of the best script writers of our time in this generation. I would say their writing style is like Quentin Tarantino but unfortunately directing A Serious Man was a mistake.


Overall, A Serious Man is a film that I wouldn't call a bad film but wouldn't call a good film either so it is just an average film. Both Invictus and Nine should have been nominated Best Picture instead of A Serious Man and The Blind Side. Unfortunately, it is the worst film so far from the Coen's and one of the most disappointing films I've seen. Their next film better bring them back on track!

Just by looking at a poster of the film, it looked a lot like Clint Eastwood's Gran Torino with the poster of an old man in a coat holding a gun. When I watched it, I absolutely adored it! Gran Torino wasn't the only film it reminded me of. The other film it reminded me of was the Jodie Foster film The Brave One. Harry Brown is a very powerful British film that is set is modern day England and the film has quite a slow pace but despite that, it was a simple story. It was a very gruesome film with a lot of psychologically disturbing moments involving drugs and sex. To be honest, this film shows the world how weak and vulnerable England has become now.


The film is set in modern day England and tells the story of an old man called Harry Brown. He is a widowed Northern Ireland veteran who is living on an Elephant And Castle housing estate that is rapidly descending youth crime. Harry takes up violence on those youths when a close friend is murdered. Michael Caine's performance was absolutely brilliant! Caine goes old school with his badass style like Clint Eastwood does in Gran Torino. I guess it goes to show that Caine's career isn't over just yet because of his performance in this film. Emily Mortimer has made a name of herself over the past few years with some good performances in great films. Other examples besides Harry Brown are Match Point, Lars And The Real Girl and most recently Martin Scorsese's Shutter Island. Mortimer portrays DI Frampton who is a cop investigating what happened to Harry's friend Leonard who was murdered with her partner DI Hicock. She also begins to work harder by keeping an eye on Harry and looking out for him so to speak because of how devastated he was to find out about Leonard's death and that he might've gone into a mad moment and craved for revenge (which is what he does). Harry Potter star David Bradley portrays Leonard.


Daniel Barber directs this film like Clint Eastwood directs Gran Torino but personally I think Barber's work on Harry Brown was better than Eastwood's. Harry Brown was quite slow paced and it didn't really feel like a very long film. It took like 40 minutes for Harry to start going for revenge on those youths who killed his friend. I like to think that the film is expressing what some neighbourhoods in Britain have become now with teenagers committing awful crimes and being let astray to take the wrong path.


Overall, Harry Brown is an absolutely fantastic film that I loved from start to finish. Michael Caine revives his old style of acting and role choices like back in 1971 when he was in Get Carter. Without a doubt one of the best films of 2009 and the best British film of the year.

I had absolutely no desire to see Marley & Me at all because I can't stand either of the two leading actors in this film but after deciding to watch it with some family, I am really glad I saw it! Marley & Me is a true story that teaches many lessons of how much of a difference pets make in a family particularly the children. Marley & Me has now become one of the very rare films that have literally made me cry. I mean, I hardly ever cry in films but seeing as I despise both Owen Wilson and Jennifer Aniston, I was never expecting up but I was wrong. It wasn't so much for the characters but was more for the dog and what an effect he became.


Marley & Me tells the story of a newlyweds John and Jenny Grogan (Wilson and Aniston) who plan to have babies. Instead, John gives Jenny a puppy. Marley becomes the worlds worst dog but his untameable spirit uplifts the Grogans at difficult moments. Owen Wilson is a pain in the arse actor as far as I am concerned and he was the main reason why I wanted to skip this film to start with but his performance in Marley & Me was satisfactory. To be honest, where is acting was quite flawed was that he didn't really seem like that family man kind of actor. Jennifer Aniston is the second actor in the film that I can't stand but her performance was satisfactory too. She was better than Owen Wilson though seeing as she was a good parent in this film and she isn't a parent in real life at all.


David Frankel has made a film that people would love for its beauty regarding the family and the dog and would make people cry for its tragic ending. However, it isn't the greatest film to watch as far as acting, direction or writing is concerned.


Overall, Marley & Me is a surprisingly brilliant film that broke my heart and made me shed a tear! Perhaps not one of the best films of 2009 but it is the most tear jerking film that I have watched since The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button.

Dear John is something that I didn't think would be THAT good. It just seemed like one of those soppy romantic war films that I would say took a lot from romantic war films like Atonement and Gone With The Wind. When I saw it, it was actually quite a good film. I mean, yeah, it had its soppy, crap moments but the plot was very good and I was taken away by some of the characters especially John's dad. It was a moving film that I would compare to Titanic (not comparing events that happen, mostly on about feelings towards drama). What I mean by this, yeah it is a sad film but not tear-jerking or jaw dropping worthy like Titanic.


Dear John tells the story of John Tyree (Channing Tatum) who is a young soldier from the Army Special Forces who falls in love with Savannah Lynn Curtis (Amanda Seyfried). John lives with his dad who has always been obsessed with his coins and hasn't really been a father to John due to this and Savannah thinks that he might be autistic like her neighbour's young son. Savannah is a college student on spring break. and during this break, she falls in love with John. When they are apart, they decide to exchange letters to each other and because of this, their lives are changed forever. I was thinking that Channing Tatum is a bit like the two dickheads from the Twilight films but his performance in this film as John was actually good and very moving. I really got into the character when I really underestimated him to start off with. Amanda Seyfried made a name of herself in 2008 summer blockbuster Mamma Mia! and now she stars in something different and delivers a very moving performance. E.T. star Henry Thomas was very good as Tim Wheddon.


Lasse Hallstrom has made a couple of great dramas in the past like Chocolat, The Cider House Rules and What's Eating Gilbert Grape? but I have to say that Dear John is another good drama that he has done. Hallstrom perhaps tries to make Dear John like how Joe Wright made Atonement and that cannot be replaced but to be fair, it wasn't a bad effort. The film may not have had been a major success critically but I think it is one that I think people should at least attempt to watch.


Overall, Dear John is a decent romantic war film that I did like. It is nothing major, it does take a lot from other romantic war films. Nevertheless a good piece of entertainment that could melt the hearts of its audiences.

Toy Story has been ever since the day of its release a landmark of cinema that changed the face of entertainment itself! It is a film that has become a very big effect in the world of cinema and is one of the rare if not the only animated film ever whos target audience is for little kids, teenagers, adults and pensioners. It shows the beauty and innocence of little children and their toys. It has a lot of child humour but adult humour as well and most importantly the toys in the film are real life toys. In fact, everything in this film are real life things! I think the way the toys talk is cute especially to little children so they can imagine talking to them so they expand on their imagination and grow up with the toys and the film (like I did). Toy Story was my favourite film as a child and I have always loved it! There are moments in the film where a lot of lessons are taught to its viewers especially to little kids. I think the main reason why the film became so effective in film itself is because it was something that nobody had ever seen before and everything about it was perfect! The characters, story, the message, target audience, EVERYTHING!


It tells the story of an old-fashioned cowboy doll called Woody (Tom Hanks) is owner Andys favourite toy but when Andy gets spaceman action figure Buzz Lightyear (Tim Allen) for his birthday which leads to Woodys bitter jealousy and wanting to get rid of Buzz once and for all so he is Andys favourite toy again. Unfortunately, their rivalry leads them to a toys worst nightmare – Sid, the boy next door who destroys toys just for fun. Together, Woody and Buzz must work together to escape and get back to their real owner. Personally, I think Toy Story (after Forrest Gump) is what Tom Hanks is best known for despite it only being his voice. His voice acting was fantastic and was perfect for the Woody character! I think what I admire about Tom Hanks the most (hence why he is my favourite actor) is because he always thinks about what films to star in (not so much in the 00s but definitely in the 90s) to see if he could play that character well and, to be honest, he has in almost every film of his career. Tim Allen was awesome as Buzz Lightyear too. Think this and the other two Toy Story films are the only films where he has been in anything major. Ahh... he was in the Santa Clause trilogy but they arent exactly major films to be taken seriously. John Ratzenberger stars in his Pixar debut and from the first Pixar (this obviously) right up until the latest and 10th film Up, he has starred in every single one and he provides the voice of piggy bank Hamm and it is his most famous Pixar voice portrayal.


After years of making animated shorts, Pixar Animation Studios go on to create their first (and perhaps their best accomplished) feature film and what a fantastic debut it was! Most of the men who have directed Pixar films after Toy Story: John Lasseter (both Toy Storys, A Bugs Life, Cars), Pete Docter (Monsters Inc., Up) and Andrew Stanton (Finding Nemo, WALL-E) all join together to see what they can do best before separately making their own films afterwards. It was like three men and Brad Bird (The Incredibles, Ratatouille) suddenly became world famous after only one film and still remain to this day after 15 years and hopefully always will be, the most successful animation film studio of all time. I would say John Lasseter is a director who loves making films that are mostly aimed at kids (same with Pete Docter) whereas Andrew Stanton and Brad Bird go more adult.


Overall, Toy Story is a very colourful classic that you will feel everything when watching it: entertained by its humour, edge of seat by intense moments, moved by its story and beautiful characters and would even feel quite scared due to the villain in the film. Toy Story is THE landmark of animation that will always have a place in my heart for the rest of my life!

MINI-REVIEW:

Romancing The Stone is an intense action Indiana Jones-like thrill ride! I mean, it does take a lot off Indiana Jones but despite that, it didn’t ruin my liking for it. Robert Zemeckis directs his first major film but Who Framed Roger Rabbit? is the film that set him on track. It is a funny film that is good for the family. Need to see the sequel The Jewel Of The Nile.

MINI-REVIEW:

This is an underrated film that deserved to be a massive successful film like the remake The Departed turned out to be. I didn’t enjoy it as much as The Departed because I saw that before this one but this original version is awesome! I wouldn’t call it one of the best foreign language films I’ve watched but it is still one that shouldn’t not to be missed.