Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Reviews18
patrokov's rating
I've never read the manga or seen the anime. I somehow managed not to see anything related to the movie other than a very short teaser more than a year ago. So I went in to see this with no expectations other than knowing Robert Rodriguez and James Cameron with behind it.
The movie does a fantastic job of world building. We see the world through Alita's eyes, discovering it as she does. (Her character has amnesia.) Note to Rian Johnson: This is how you subvert expectations. Despite her amnesia (or perhaps because of it) Alita has an enthusiastic desire to see and learn everything with no sense of distrust or fear. More naive than innocent. In some ways,
The story of this movie is more of an origin story, setting up Alita's character and world-building than telling an epic tail. In some ways, it's what the Phantom Menace wanted to be (but of course the Phantom Menace failed). Take these random characters and throw them together with someone who will change their lives and maybe one day the world.
Alita's doesn't try to be a badass. She just is one because of the strength of her convictions and desire to do the right thing. It's awe-inspiring as she grows in her abilities and determination (a growth we actually get to see, unlike a certain Anakin Skywalker). There are a couple moments in the movie where the entire theater applauds her actions.
It's not a perfect movie, but it's a great movie. I wish we had more movies like this. The only real flaw of the movie is that we don't yet know if it's going to have a sequel. It certainly deserves one.
The movie does a fantastic job of world building. We see the world through Alita's eyes, discovering it as she does. (Her character has amnesia.) Note to Rian Johnson: This is how you subvert expectations. Despite her amnesia (or perhaps because of it) Alita has an enthusiastic desire to see and learn everything with no sense of distrust or fear. More naive than innocent. In some ways,
The story of this movie is more of an origin story, setting up Alita's character and world-building than telling an epic tail. In some ways, it's what the Phantom Menace wanted to be (but of course the Phantom Menace failed). Take these random characters and throw them together with someone who will change their lives and maybe one day the world.
Alita's doesn't try to be a badass. She just is one because of the strength of her convictions and desire to do the right thing. It's awe-inspiring as she grows in her abilities and determination (a growth we actually get to see, unlike a certain Anakin Skywalker). There are a couple moments in the movie where the entire theater applauds her actions.
It's not a perfect movie, but it's a great movie. I wish we had more movies like this. The only real flaw of the movie is that we don't yet know if it's going to have a sequel. It certainly deserves one.
Nothing in this review is a spoiler if you have already seen the Lord of Rings (LOTR) trilogy (or read the book)!!! The Hobbit was a pretty short, children's book describing how a hobbit, Bilbo Baggins, went on an adventure with Gandalf and a group of dwarfs to reclaim their mountain from a dragon. The book just happens to include Bilbo finding a magic ring that makes the wearer invisible.
When Tolkien later wrote LOTR, he decided that the ring from The Hobbit would become the ring of Sauron. He also decided to place all of the random, throwaway events from The Hobbit into a larger history of Middle Earth.
This movie is NOT an adaptation of the book, The Hobbit. It is an adaptation of the history of that Tolkien later constructed. This is great news for people that love Tolkien and have read the appendices of LOTR. Unfortunately, it waters down the story of The Hobbit and Bilbo's adventures and makes the movie(s) overlong, overcomplicated, and drag in parts. I can't help but think it would have been a much tighter, more understandable story. My relatives who are not Tolkienistas were lost during much of the movie, as it inter-cuts Bilbo's adventure with the events of the larger history.
Once the DVDs come out, I hope a "Bilbo only" cut is released (or done by a fan, like the no Jar Jar version of Phantom Menace).
The movie is an odd mix of tones. The book was a children's book and much lighter than LOTR in tone. Parts of the movie are very light and even dangerous moments are often played for laughs. The caves are very bright and, contrary to the LOTR, some of the orcs almost have a cartoon/animated style. Meanwhile other parts of the movie are played very seriously.
Gollum, of course, steals every scene he's in and looks even better than in the LOTR movies.
Of course everyone who has seen the trailer knows the dwarfs' song. The movie is faithful in that regard to the books including the poems and songs.
Don't get me wrong. The movie is great, and, of course I can't wait to see the next ones, and one day the "Bilbo cut". So maybe Peter Jackson isn't crazy after all. But it could have been better.
When Tolkien later wrote LOTR, he decided that the ring from The Hobbit would become the ring of Sauron. He also decided to place all of the random, throwaway events from The Hobbit into a larger history of Middle Earth.
This movie is NOT an adaptation of the book, The Hobbit. It is an adaptation of the history of that Tolkien later constructed. This is great news for people that love Tolkien and have read the appendices of LOTR. Unfortunately, it waters down the story of The Hobbit and Bilbo's adventures and makes the movie(s) overlong, overcomplicated, and drag in parts. I can't help but think it would have been a much tighter, more understandable story. My relatives who are not Tolkienistas were lost during much of the movie, as it inter-cuts Bilbo's adventure with the events of the larger history.
Once the DVDs come out, I hope a "Bilbo only" cut is released (or done by a fan, like the no Jar Jar version of Phantom Menace).
The movie is an odd mix of tones. The book was a children's book and much lighter than LOTR in tone. Parts of the movie are very light and even dangerous moments are often played for laughs. The caves are very bright and, contrary to the LOTR, some of the orcs almost have a cartoon/animated style. Meanwhile other parts of the movie are played very seriously.
Gollum, of course, steals every scene he's in and looks even better than in the LOTR movies.
Of course everyone who has seen the trailer knows the dwarfs' song. The movie is faithful in that regard to the books including the poems and songs.
Don't get me wrong. The movie is great, and, of course I can't wait to see the next ones, and one day the "Bilbo cut". So maybe Peter Jackson isn't crazy after all. But it could have been better.
When the most memorable thing you remember coming out of a movie is that you were annoyed by the camera work, you know there is a problem. Proper shaky camera work can convey a sense of chaos and action (see the Gladiator for its proper use), but here, it just distracts and confuses. During the action scenes, it obscures what is going on (especially if you're sitting relatively close to the screen). During a quiet moment, it completely takes you out of the movie. Try this experiment. Sit down across from anyone at a cafe or restaurant. Notice how much jitter there is around their face and head...right none! Now watch Matt Damon have a conversation with Julia Stiles...that's right, I didn't say Jason Bourne, because the camera is so shaky, that you think you're watching Matt Damon's home movies filmed on an antique camera by his uncle with Parkinson's disease.
Now that the big one is out of the way, let's critique the movie. The camera-work aside, this is an enjoyable movie featuring everyone's favorite amnesiac superspy. It delivers on over the top action with a modicum of cerebral superspy stuff. It has a few nods to previous movies, prominently highlighting the last line of the second movie. The hand to hand fight scenes are phenomenal. I really enjoy the Arnis based combat (obscured by the camera-work as it is). I just wish they would teach the actors real gun handling. (Watch Collateral for some good handling.)
The Bourne Identity sounded the death knell for James Bond, by raising the bar to unreachable heights. Unfortunately, the Bourne Supremacy and Ultimatum both failed to reach that bar. Instead the producers decided that they would simply try to one up other movies. Transporter 1 and 2? We can be crazier with driving. Casino Royale? we got that covered. Unfortunately, Bourne is at his best when doing his cerebral, superspy shtick, and there just wasn't enough of it. The best scene in the movie happens in the first twenty minutes. The rest of the movie, while good, just doesn't live up to its promise.
I hope they bring Bourne out for a fourth movie, but do us all a favor, and fire Greengrass before he destroys the franchise.
Slight spoiler below:
There's also two continuity/sequencing issues, where you're not sure whether they're in London or New York. And how does "the asset" magically get from one continent to another? Why not use another asset? Where they running out of asset actors?
Now that the big one is out of the way, let's critique the movie. The camera-work aside, this is an enjoyable movie featuring everyone's favorite amnesiac superspy. It delivers on over the top action with a modicum of cerebral superspy stuff. It has a few nods to previous movies, prominently highlighting the last line of the second movie. The hand to hand fight scenes are phenomenal. I really enjoy the Arnis based combat (obscured by the camera-work as it is). I just wish they would teach the actors real gun handling. (Watch Collateral for some good handling.)
The Bourne Identity sounded the death knell for James Bond, by raising the bar to unreachable heights. Unfortunately, the Bourne Supremacy and Ultimatum both failed to reach that bar. Instead the producers decided that they would simply try to one up other movies. Transporter 1 and 2? We can be crazier with driving. Casino Royale? we got that covered. Unfortunately, Bourne is at his best when doing his cerebral, superspy shtick, and there just wasn't enough of it. The best scene in the movie happens in the first twenty minutes. The rest of the movie, while good, just doesn't live up to its promise.
I hope they bring Bourne out for a fourth movie, but do us all a favor, and fire Greengrass before he destroys the franchise.
Slight spoiler below:
There's also two continuity/sequencing issues, where you're not sure whether they're in London or New York. And how does "the asset" magically get from one continent to another? Why not use another asset? Where they running out of asset actors?