Rukaio's Reviews: Year 9 (Competition Time!)

[Alpha]

OMG Sharkz is the best movie of the year, and you suckers all know it.

Edited September 23, 2014 by Alpha

[4815162342]

Without even looking I will assume Rukaio did not like Clear and Present Danger for 3 main reasons:

1) too long

2) no "strong female character"

3) politics-based thematic issues

[rukaio101]

Without even looking I will assume Rukaio did not like Clear and Present Danger for 3 main reasons:

1) too long

2) no "strong female character"

3) politics-based thematic issues

Only got one of those right. The other two I couldn't care less about.

 

(The female character thing only bothered me in Star Wars because you had multiple major female characters who were portrayed as strong and really should've been strong but noticeably weren't. C&PD barely had any female characters (which is not a flaw by itself) so I didn't have any issue with it.)

[Rorschach]

Vector- F

If I wanted to watch two hours of nothing but people running, I would shoot myself because that’s a fecking stupid thing to want to watch.

Response: Somebody should play the app

[Rorschach]

Without knowing my guess for the Ashley, Kansas review.

1. C&P of the original pasta

2. Not that interesting

3. Leaves you hanging at the end

4. Anti-climactic

5. Whatever quote Alpha quoted from Numbers

That's what comes to mind for me.

[Rorschach]

Side-note: I really despise Baz Luhrman. Moulin Rouge! is one of the worst films I've ever seen, Romeo & Juliet had no reason to take place in modern day and Australia was just meh. Sort of digged Gatsby though.

[rukaio101]

Without knowing my guess for the Ashley, Kansas review.

1. C&P of the original pasta

2. Not that interesting

3. Leaves you hanging at the end

4. Anti-climactic

5. Whatever quote Alpha quoted from Numbers

That's what comes to mind for me.

Ironically none of those I was going to mention during my review (albeit because I didn't know the first one).

[4815162342]

Romeo & Juliet had no reason to take place in modern day a

 

That's no issue. Famous old plays and operas are redone to be in more recent eras all the time.

[Rorschach]

That's no issue. Famous old plays and operas are redone to be in more recent eras all the time.

Yes and most of the time, I don't really like them.

[Blankments]

Yes and most of the time, I don't really like them.

That's a shame; those are usually the only film adaptations of Shakespeare I can stand

[4815162342]

Yes and most of the time, I don't really like them.

 

So then you'd hate Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet since it takes place in the 19th Century as opposed to the Late Renaissance Era.

 

Which is a big shame.

Edited September 23, 2014 by 4815162342

[Rorschach]

So then you'd hate Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet since it takes place in the 19th Century as opposed to the Late Renaissance Era.

 

Which is a big shame.

That and Titus are the only ones I think are fairly good. Just good though.

[rukaio101]

August review time!

 

The Cloud- D

 

This film jumps between being incredibly cliché, ripping of Independence Day and being absolutely unintentionally hilarious. Some of my favourite quotes include…

 

“The bigger ship releases a giant thing.”

 

“An approach on Kevin’s face is done.”

 

“He also says they dropped closer to water, and we were seen reuniting lots of it.”

 

Seriously, I am tempted to skip Expedecade and go straight to MST3K-ing this. I’m definitely going to MST3K it at some point because there is just too much comic potential here. It’s definitely not a good film and not as ‘So Bad it’s Good’ as the first Horror House, but it has a excellent amount of snark bait.

 

 

Mickey after Walt- Whateventhefuck/10

 

Why do you keep doing this to me Blank? 

 

 

Fortune’s Hunters- A-

 

It’s basically The Good, the Bad and the Ugly with a new lick of paint. But damn it, I really love The Good, the Bad and the Ugly so I can’t give it a bad review.

 

 

Urinetown- C

 

I was wondering when we’d get a Wiki C&P this quarter. You know, after my own.

 

 

Candle Cove- F

 

Funny they should call it ‘Candle Cove: Tales of the Laughing Stock’. Because it’s not even that. It’s just kinda there.

 

 

The Yellow Wallpaper- B

 

Actually pretty damn good. Admittedly, there’s a bit of a lack of content, but it fits Wan’s style well and Rose Byrne is perfectly cast (and quite frankly I can’t truly hate anything with her in it). The ending is a bit too ‘generic horror movie’ though. And the scene after that with John and another woman just confused me. But it was still a good watch.

 

 

The Disappearance of Ashley, Kansas- D

 

A C&P of the original creepypasta and it shows. While that format may work fine for a tale on the internet, in film form it just comes off as a series of ridiculously short incidents that basically go nowhere. There are no characters we can follow through the whole thing, it’s just a bunch of random events.

 

While I rated Kansas lower because just how poorly it handles its subject material, it’s at least better written and structured than this.

 

 

Train to Paradise- C+

 

Pretty much unchanged from my first readthrough so I’ll just say what I said there.

 

Okay, my biggest problem with the film is that it seems... well... incredibly generic for an 'abusive childhood' story. You've got the abusive father, the drug addict mother, the main character becoming apathetic towards school and turning to drugs, etc etc. Christ, the only thing it was missing was the innocent little sister dying in some sort of tragic way. It feels like stuff I've seen a million times before in cheap 'tragic' books and it doesn't do much interesting with it.

 

One of the main reasons it feels so generic is because, Lily aside, the rest of the supporting cast is incredibly flat. The abusive Dad is the generic abusive Dad who hits his daughters because 'abusive'. The Mom is the generic useless drug addict parent who takes drugs because 'drug addict'. The sister is the generic innocent 'too good for this sinful earth' kid who we're supposed to feel bad for when bad things happen. The film doesn’t do anything interesting characters or attempt to explain or explore why they’re that way. They’re just like that because ‘tragic’.

 

Another problem I've got is with the framing device, in that the film does't really do anything with it. If you removed the entire train sequence at the beginning, nearly nothing of story value would be lost except that clumsy title drop.

 

That said, there are definitely positives to it. It's well written, easy to get through and didn't feel too long or sluggish. And clichés do exist for a reason and aren’t necessarily bad. But this movie could’ve been so much better.

[ChD]

Train to Paradise- C+

 

Pretty much unchanged from my first readthrough so I’ll just say what I said there.

 

Okay, my biggest problem with the film is that it seems... well... incredibly generic for an 'abusive childhood' story. You've got the abusive father, the drug addict mother, the main character becoming apathetic towards school and turning to drugs, etc etc. Christ, the only thing it was missing was the innocent little sister dying in some sort of tragic way. It feels like stuff I've seen a million times before in cheap 'tragic' books and it doesn't do much interesting with it.

 

One of the main reasons it feels so generic is because, Lily aside, the rest of the supporting cast is incredibly flat. The abusive Dad is the generic abusive Dad who hits his daughters because 'abusive'. The Mom is the generic useless drug addict parent who takes drugs because 'drug addict'. The sister is the generic innocent 'too good for this sinful earth' kid who we're supposed to feel bad for when bad things happen. The film doesn’t do anything interesting characters or attempt to explain or explore why they’re that way. They’re just like that because ‘tragic’.

 

Another problem I've got is with the framing device, in that the film does't really do anything with it. If you removed the entire train sequence at the beginning, nearly nothing of story value would be lost except that clumsy title drop.

 

That said, there are definitely positives to it. It's well written, easy to get through and didn't feel too long or sluggish. And clichés do exist for a reason and aren’t necessarily bad. But this movie could’ve been so much better.

 

I was actually going to change much of the story, but it was too late. I hadn't checked this forum and didn't know the deadline had been added. Or if I did know, I surely didn't remember.

[4815162342]

Yeah, I wrote Fortune's Hunters in Year 26 of the original CAYOM, so mid to late 2008 and it was very influenced by TGTBATU. If I had the time I would have made a fair bit of changes, but since time was short I just changed the casting and director around.

[Rorschach]

Candle Cove- F

Funny they should call it ‘Candle Cove: Tales of the Laughing Stock’. Because it’s not even that. It’s just kinda there.

That makes no sense. It's the title of the book the guy is writing. That just really makes no sense whatsoever.

And it just dawned on me that none of you guys seem to like any of my films at all. Is it because they are just complete and utter shit or am I missing something?

Edited September 25, 2014 by Rorschach

[rukaio101]

Candle Cove- F

Funny they should call it ‘Candle Cove: Tales of the Laughing Stock’. Because it’s not even that. It’s just kinda there.

That makes no sense. It's the title of the book the guy is writing. That just really makes no sense whatsoever.

It's a comment about how it's not even the kind of bad that I can joke about. (aka a 'Laughing Stock') It's just there. Also, you don't mention that it's the name of the book in your film so how am I supposed to know that.

 

 

And it just dawned on me that none of you guys seem to like any of my films at all. Is it because they are just complete and utter shit or am I missing something?

I gave Into the Dead a B.

 

Besides, it's a bit much to complain about no-one liking your films this quarter, when you've only posted a C&P of a creepypasta and two films that are only a few sentences long.

[Rorschach]

Good point. I lack detail in my fillers. That is a pretty big problem. I'll make sure to fix that.

[Blankments]

Mickey after Walt- Whateventhefuck/10

 

Why do you keep doing this to me Blank? 

[rukaio101]

Okay, in the attempt to inspire other people to do some fucking reviews, here's September. It really probably shouldn't have taken me this long since there are only like two proper movies, but I was busy.

 

Tyler Perry’s Madea’s Time Machine- fuckit/10

 

God damn it, Blank.

 

 

My Little Pony- C

 

Wiki C&P

 

 

Sailing Champion- D

 

Basic filler but dammit, I really wanted to know what Burt’s plan was. My theory is he was trying to summon Cthulu.

 

 

This is not a Game- C+

 

Kind of a wasted premise here. I mean, you've got these virtual reality video games which you could probably do some cool Matrix/Total Recall 'is it real or is not' stuff and, when China broke out into martial law, I honestly thought that was the angle you were going for (and that the ridiculous zero-forshadowed twist about the stock bots was just a meta comment on poor writing in video games or something). But nope. It was real life the whole time. The one time you do do something interesting with it (use it to recreate Austin's death) it's just used to provide a basic clue and then entirely forgotten about. The rest is just a generic thriller. It's a decently written generic thriller (apart from the stock bots twist which was stupid) but the whole time I was much more interested in the technology in the background than the characters and story chosen to be focused on.

 

In hindsight, considering the title, I probably should've guessed it was 'not a game' but you could've at least introduced an element of doubt.

 

Heaven- B-

 

First of all, can I just say that whatever genius came up with some of those twists in the 2nd act is brilliant and should be eternally praised by everyone. Because he's obviously very talented and is probably incredibly handsome as well. And very well endowed.

 

Joking out of the way, I find myself agreeing with a lot of Numbers's review. For all the potential in the concept, the film fails to really delve deeply into many of the questions it raises. The third and final act is the most guilty of this, ignoring all the moral ambiguity and complex questions raised in place of the obviously evil Vice President (being played by Hannibal Lecter doesn't help) destroying the obviously good Paradisi because of an incredibly flimsy justification (akin to blaming the airline companies for 9/11). In addition, it struggles from trying to explore too much at once and several main characters (most notably Anthony, Wesley and Florence) end up being pretty shafted in terms of characterisation and development through the film. Personally, I would've dropped the religious element altogether as the film really struggles to connect it with the technological side other than having loud-mouthed religious people object because that's what loud-mouthed religious people do.

 

That said, it was an easy enough read, the first two acts were pretty good and I genuinely really liked Jackie Lynch, a character who really interested me towards the end by still obviously not agreeing with what John is doing but understanding that shutting him down is a worse thing to do. She really made a nice change from the typical 'black or white' characters we usually see in her place. (Although admittedly she ended up making Anthony feel even more superfluous and that prayer at the end was just glurge inducing.) I might even support McDormand for a Best Supporting Actress nod in the same way I'd support Pedro Pascal for a Best Supporting Actor nod for Clear and Present Danger.

 

To sum up, while not as bad as Transcendence, Heaven still fails to properly explore the ideas raised by the integration of man and machine. Honestly, at this point, I'm kinda tempted to have a go myself at the concept to see if I can do it any better.