Average User Score: 8.1Dec 18, 2012"The Hobbit" brought me back to a feeling I've only had once before, in 2001, after watching "The Fellowship of the Ring". I looked forward to"The Hobbit" brought me back to a feeling I've only had once before, in 2001, after watching "The Fellowship of the Ring". I looked forward to December 2002 due to that film, and now I look forward to December 2013 due to "The Hobbit".
I have read the book several times, and I did enjoy Jackson's take on it. When the credits rolled, I was left wishing for more. "The Hobbit" takes its time. We don't leave Bilbo's house until 40 minutes have passed. But I had the same experience when reading the novel. It starts awfully slow and then picks up and gives you the wildest adventures imaginable. It is actually refreshing to have a movie that takes its time to develop and move forward. It even takes some pauses from the forward moving action, and gives the audience some time to breath, and enjoy the world of Tolkien and Jackson without worrying about plot details the whole time.
The professional level of the movie is the same as with "Lord of the Rings" trilogy. It's all superb. The 3D experience is the first "clear" and fresh 3D experience I've had. It probably has something to do with the 48 frames per second.
Peter Jackson has done it again. Even though this adventure may have smaller stakes than "LOTR", the stakes are high enough, with villains sinister enough and heroes humble enough to make a great adventure. I'm not the least worried about "The Hobbit" being three movies, since I felt the novel was too short anyway, especially descriptions of the war of 5 armies.… Expand
Average User Score: 7.9May 4, 2012"The Avengers" is thoughtful, funny, charming, consistent, and balances quiet moments with extremely clear and well executed action scenes."The Avengers" is thoughtful, funny, charming, consistent, and balances quiet moments with extremely clear and well executed action scenes. Some critics have talked about Samuel L. Jackson's glue for the superhero team, but Clark Gregg's Agent Coulson is the true glue, the one character that brings heart to the parade.
All of the characters are a marvel to watch, they each continue their story arcs as introduced in previous films, no time is wasted on exposition, and The Hulk finally gets to shine in a brilliant performance by Mark Ruffalo. Robert Downey Jr. is hilarious as always, and matching his timing and talents with the words of Josh Whedon is like marriage made in a heavenly hell. Nice stuff! Other characters become slightly minor, but all of them have their moments. My whole family left the theatre with a smile on our faces.… Expand
Average User Score: 7.9Oct 10, 2011"Drive" is different. It's a modern western with extremely violent death scenes. It reminded me of Sergio Leone's westerns with the nameless"Drive" is different. It's a modern western with extremely violent death scenes. It reminded me of Sergio Leone's westerns with the nameless hero at center, cleaning up the mess left behind by very bad people.
While Eastwood's Blondie was a silent type without expression, but still likeable, Gosling's nameless hero is pretty silent, but impressively expressive at the same time. He goes through all the motions with real emotion, and even though none of his back story appears, we know that he has a dark past that has driven him into the underworld, into hiding from something terrible, something that always comes back to haunt him. Albert Brooks is surprisingly effective as a cold, cold bastard. I admit getting a little tired of Carey Mulligan, that sweet wife with the sweet kid, and an unfortunate husband. However, I understood why she was important. The characters seemed emotionally invested in each other, which added context to the action. And what an action. The driving was not disappointing, nor the heavy brutality of the killings, which were just as ugly as brutal as killings must be. Nothing attractive about the violence in this film.
When watching Ryan Gosling, I feel there is finally an actor comparable with the great Jimmy Stewart. He can both act sweet and cruel, desperate and calm, and at every moment believable. Without Gosling, this would have been just another action movie about a loner seeking justice in an unjust world.… Expand
Average User Score: 7.1Oct 10, 2011"Real Steel" might be a success with 7 to 12 year old boys, who think that action without soul is cool. Robots get into the ring and duke it"Real Steel" might be a success with 7 to 12 year old boys, who think that action without soul is cool. Robots get into the ring and duke it out forever. Special effects are nice. Unfortunately there is nothing interesting about these robots. They are just chess pieces inside a single square. The players are outside the ring, but turn out not to be interesting at all. The queen of Lost is lost. "Wolverine" attempts to be "Han Solo", but fails to both shoot first, and even shoot at all. There is a boy in this movie, someone kids can relate to, good with technology, able to remake a robot overnight in a trailer, add voice control and stuff like that. Normal kid. It could have worked if the story wasn't so overly sentimental. I think every major character shed a tear close to the end. I did not. What "Real Steel" needed was some reality and some steel. Some kind of chaos would have been nice. Some conflict that you could believe. Well, "Real Steel" didn't work for me, but due to impressive animation I'm willing to give the movie 3 out of 10. I saw potential in this movie. Like at a moment when a robot hugs a kid, what would have happened if the robot had by accident squeezed a bit too hard? I guess it wouldn't have been such a cute movie, but could have raised the stakes from zero to something, at least. Maybe.… Expand