Showing posts with label Liam Neeson. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Liam Neeson. Show all posts

Tuesday, 9 April 2013

The Dark Knight Rises (2012) - ★

Director: Christopher Nolan
Writer: Christopher Nolan
Stars: Christian Bale, Anne Hathaway, Michael Caine, Tom Hardy, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Gary Oldman, Marion Cotillard, Morgan Freeman, Liam Neeson


I was thoroughly unimpressed with this movie. It was boring, unoriginal, predictable, and a huge disappointment. I’m a fan of The Dark Knight mainly because of Heath Ledger’s performance as The Joker. Without him, The Dark Knight Rises was nothing but a stupid comic-book adaptation that took itself too seriously.

Monday, 19 November 2012

Gangs of New York (2002) - ★★★★

Director: Martin Scorsese
Writers: Jay Cocks
Stars: Leonardo DiCaprio, Daniel Day-Lewis, Cameron Diaz, Brendan Gleeson, Jim Broadbent, John C. Reilly, Henry Thomas, Liam Neeson

Gangs of New York is a film about the 'hands that built America.' It's visually stunning and riveting from start to finish. I thoroughly enjoyed this film, except for one key component. That is DiCaprio's performance as the main character Amsterdam Vallon. 

Set in 1863 and during the time of the American Civil War, Gangs of New York shows that America was born in the streets. It begins with a brutal battle between rival gangs, one side led by 'Priest' Vallon (Liam Neeson), the other Bill the Butcher (Daniel Day-Lewis). After Bill wins the battle and kills Vallon, his son Amsterdam returns to the Five Points seeking vengeance against the psychotic gangland kingpin. Along the way he falls for pickpocket Jenny (Cameron Diaz), who stays by his side as he creates a whole new army. With the Civil War affecting New York and thousands of Irish immigrants pouring into the streets, the fight for vengeance is much more complicated for Vallon. 

Daniel Day-Lewis absolutely shines in one of his greatest performances as Bill the Butcher. He lit up every scene with his superior skills in acting, turning this good movie into a great one. It is easy to like him, but even easier to hate him, with his racist beliefs and the blood that is on his hands. With that said, he made DiCaprio's so-so performance fade into the background.

For a film that follows his character's story, there was nothing DiCaprio could do to save him from becoming almost obsolete in the grand scheme of things. I was rooting for his character, yet put off by one major issue. I think DiCaprio is pretty good at accents, but he was very inconsistent with maintaining his Irish accent. In the voice-over scenes he sounded Irish enough, but when the time came for him to speak on screen, it faded into his usual American accent. He had the same trouble with the film Blood Diamond, which unfortunately takes away from the film.

The supporting cast however did a phenomenal job. Diaz turned out a good performance as Jenny, who was both likable and believable as an Irish woman. Brendan Gleeson commanded much screen presence as Walter McGinn, a man who hates Bill with a fiery passion. Jim Broadbent also gave a great performance as William Tweed, a politician that exchanges favors with the gang bosses of New York.

The cinematography throughout the film was truly magnificent. It was incredible to see the detail and effort that went into the making of old New York. This was one of the most important parts of the film, and Michael Ballhaus did a masterful job at reconstructing the great city. I also liked the music that accompanied many scenes in the film, albeit unorthodox for such a film as this. I say this because it is quite modern, considering the period that Gangs of New York is set it.

What truly made this film great for me was the build up towards the ending, and of course the ending itself. It was thrilling to see the backlash that conscription during the Civil War caused in New York at the time. The war that was about to happen between Vallon and Bill was almost as thrilling, but seemed secondary in comparison to the historic significance of the riots.

In the end we find that the quarrels between two men don't amount "to a hill of beans." The violent and destructive riots of the Civil War swallow up the main story of vengeance, leaving the audience with the premise that in the grand scheme of things, the grievances between Vallon and Bill are insignificant. What I truly loved about this film is that it admits that the story isn't as big as the events surrounding it at the time. This is one of Scorsese's best films.


Thursday, 5 April 2012

Wrath of the Titans (2012) - ★★


Director: Jonathan Liebesman
Writers: Dan Mazeu, David Johnson
Stars: Sam Worthington, Liam Neeson, Ralph Fiennes, Rosamund Pike, Edgar Ramirez, Toby Kebbell, Bill Nighy

I had high hopes for Wrath of the Titans. It promised to be a visually amazing, action-packed superior film to its prequel Clash of the Titans, however it fell flat due to Sam Worthington's laughable performance as Perseus, bastard son of Zeus (Liam Neeson). I had major problems with his acting in the first film, but he was far worse in this installment.

The story was very Hollywood. Ares, God of War and son of Zeus is jealous of Perseus because his father paid more attention to him. He sides with Hades, Ralph Fiennes, in a plot to drain Zeus' powers and awaken the titan Kronos, the father of Hades, Poseidon and Zeus. Perseus must save the world once again on his black Pegasus in order to give his son a future and save humanity. He also has a small romance with Andromeda (Rosamund Pike), a character that is supposed to be strong and smart yet is small and feeble. She was insignificant to the whole movie.

It made me sick that Dan Mazeau made the God of War seem so childish, stupid and weak. According to this film, Gods are not beyond being complete idiots. None of the gods showed real power. They are the same size as humans and use peoples prayers as their source of power. There was no background on the story between Zeus and Kronos. In my opinion, they should have scrapped making a sequel to Clash of the Titans, and instead have made a prequel. This would have involved a mighty war between Titans and Gods, where we could have seen some truly stunning scenes and be rid of Sam Worthington's lamentable acting.

The reason I have not rated this movie lower is because the visual effects and fights throughout the movie were actually entertaining. We see brilliant cyclops', two headed monsters, a minotaur, and the greatest part of the movie; Kronos emerging from a volcano. While these were remarkable, I couldn't shake my annoyance at how bad the story and acting was from all accounts. Wrath of the Titans is a movie that had a huge amount of potential, yet will fail to be remembered by anyone.

14th May, 2013: Hi everyone. I completely forgot that I reviewed this movie. Upon revising what I'd written, it just goes to show that I wasn't kidding about how forgettable it was!

Tuesday, 6 March 2012

Clash of the Titans (2010) - ★★★

Director: Louis Leterrier
Writers: Travis Beacham (screenplay) Phil Hay (screenplay)
Stars: Sam Worthington, Liam Neeson, Ralph Fiennes, Gemma Arterton, Mads Mikkelsen

Clash of the Titans is a story about the mortal son of the god Zeus (Liam Neeson), Perseus (Sam Worthington), who embarks on a perilous journey to stop the underworld and its minions from spreading their evil to Earth as well as the heavens. Zeus' brother, Hades (Ralph Fiennes), has hatched a scheme to usurp the throne from Zeus because of a feud they had extremely long ago when he was tricked and then condemned to be the God of the Underworld. Sounds like a pretty interesting storyline right? 


I think the greatest thing about this movie are the monsters that were involved, such as The Kraken, Medusa, Giant Scorpions, Djinn (magic creatures of the desert), and the Sisters of Fate. I thought all of these creatures were created beautifully and really were the highlight of the film. Particularly the CGI on the Kraken, it was just remarkable. 


Sam Worthington is one of those actors that can't carry make me feel any emotion. Even in Avatar, he just seemed to be a blank canvas. As Perseus, his distinct Australian accent and so-so acting were perhaps one of the lowest points of the movie. The thing that held this movie back was the way it was adapted to appeal to the younger audience. I hated how there were silly jokes and a love story I just couldn't connect to, and I'm usually a sucker for a good romance. I also have to mention the fact that it is hardly historically accurate too. Liam Neeson didn't play a very convincing Zeus. He just didn't exude power or wisdome, whereas Ralph Fiennes was flawless once again as Hades. Fiennes is just one of those actors that can make a crappy movie look good. As a whole I found Clash of the Titans entertaining, but also disappointing. It sets you up to think there will be brilliant battles and non-stop action. Unfortunately we got some of that and a lot of love story.