Montag's Movie Reviews

Alright, so I've had a very long string of movies that have been good and I've loved them all like strange only recently discovered children that I will send off to homes where they will be well cared for, but I will not see them again unless I really want to. (always terrible to end a sentence with a preposition XP). So, bearing that in mind, this will be the last "good" review I do for a little while. After this, I will issue as much bile as I can muster. But until I find a worthy nemesis on which to unleash my critical venom, it's time to say some more good things about another good movie. Chronicles of Narnia: Voyage of the Dawn Treader is a wonderful, whimsical, child-like (not to be confused with child-ish), classical fairytale adventure. One of the first things I want to say about this movie is that it is beautiful, well written, atmospheric, and character driven. The last thing I'd like to say about this movie is that it looks gr

So apparently prior to TRON coming out, there was a whole bunch of media exposure that I just missed out on. I don't watch TV too much and I'm not a big follower on YouTube. Roughly a month or two before TRON was released, there was a massive amount of media exposure on TV in theaters and online. A big chunk of it had to do with the fact that international techno sensations Daft and Punk were writing the soundtrack for the movie, or at least a good portion of said soundtrack. So I missed all the hype. Which for me seems great because I didn't get over-exposed to the film like a lot of other people and was able to see the movie with dewy fresh fan eyes and not cold jaded reviewer eyes. Ok so enough crap lets get down to the review: a good number of critics have put the spurs to the old girl and I think that's honestly a bit unfair. To be completely honest, having been based on a movie that's just 2 years shy of being 2 decades old, I think the

 If I were to describe faster in a single word it would be this: surprising. Granted, Faster was everything I expected it to be, a violent rage fueled revenge festival, but it was also a lot of things I wasn't expecting at all. The first and most surprising thing about this movie was that Dwayne Johnson is a good actor in the right circumstances. Either he was born to play this character or something else just synced up at the right time. Now I'm not saying that Johnson is a bad actor, I'm just saying that in my opinion, he hasn't been a terribly good actor in the past. In the case of Driver however, Dwayne Johnson's performance was excellent. His character has a constant agitated sense of restlessness. Even when he's not moving, you can sense the tension he feels and the intense emotions that drive him. There isn't much back story and I think that's part of what makes the movie great. You've got violent protagonist X within

So, the most basic question anyone wants to know right off the bat is: is this movie good? Well sorry to dissapoint, but you're going to have to wait for that a bit. The first thing to note about this movie is that it's in 3D and it's good. There is a critical fact to note about movies when they are released in 3D: were they originally intended to be in 3D and were they filmed for 3D from the beginning? One notable example of where this failed was clash of the titans, where the 3D effects were simply tacked on at the end in post-production and the lack of immersion was a total letdown (the only upside to that movie being the presence of smokin' hottie Gemma Arterton). A very good example of immersive 3D filming where it was designed for 3D from start to finish was James Cameron's Avatar, which was amazing. The thing that made Avatar so good was that in spite of what anyone said about the film, the experience was immersive and memorable and for

The A-Team: A movie review Share Yesterday at 11:20pm | Edit Note | Delete Lately there has been a trend of re-packaging nostalgia using contemporary wrapping paper. Now usually I'm quick to call foul when I sense a lack of creativity, but recently, it seems like the re-packaging has gone over pretty well in several cases. Alright so lets dive right in: this movie is an origin story about the A-Team and all the crazy hi jinx they get up to along the way. How closely is it tied to the 80's TV show that it's based on? I don't really know, never watched the show. But, I do feel that it stands pretty strong on its own merits all the same. The casting was the first right choice the films creators made. Everyone is great for the role they play, especially Murdock. Sharlto Copley is someone I had never heard of before his debut in District 9, so I had no real feel for his style or personality going into district 9 or the a team. I must say though t

Your note has been created. Prince of Persia The Sands of Time: A movie review Share Today at 3:37am | Edit Note | Delete Ok, so going in I had pretty high hopes for this movie for 2 reasons: the Prince of Persia game series was friggin' awesome and pirates of the Caribbean was a fun movie to watch. But I was worried like so many people who have seen beloved video games turned into crap movies: what if they screw this up and completely ruin the memory of something that was totally awesome for me? We've seen it so many times: street fighter (arguably the worst video game movie ever), Mortal Kombat, Super Mario Bros, Wing Commander, Double Dragon, the list goes on and on. The appetite of Hollywood for cashing in on name recognition at the cost of artistic integrity can never be fully satisfied it seems. However, all members of the gaming community can breath just a little bit easier this time (at least in my opinion). The movie is good, not great or spe

Word on the street has is that Iron Man 2 is a boring film. That's depends on what you're looking for in a film. If you're looking for a lot of great lines, big swooping scenes, some physicality and a lot of "Mommy, wow!" moments, Iron Man 2 delivers...if you're a fan of clever dialog. The lines were dense and duplicit constantly popping off like a fully automatic weapon. Sitting in the theater I was instantly reminded of His Girl Friday specifically and 30's films generically. Despite the Jazz Singer being release in '27, it took some time to perfect and implement dialog recording devices that would actually work with film. When the technology was finally there, writers went hogwild with the ability to put their words in character's mouths to the point that a lot of early talkies had more dialog than they needed just to use this new development. Iron Man 2 carries on this tradition; it is not a film for the lazy ear. Much like the first film,

Iron Man 2: A movie review Share Today at 10:17am | Edit Note | Delete Ok, so I was really excited when I first saw the trailer for this movie. Then I saw the second trailer and I was like HOLY CRAP IT'S WAR MACHINE!! And yes he does feature prominently in this movie. Right from the beginning this movie is good, the pacing is excellent, there are no lulls waiting for something interesting to happen. There's good character development, engaging relationships between the characters, a well written (if not especially deep story, but that's ok this isn't supposed to be Tolstoy), solid action, interesting villains and lots of good explosions =D. Now there is the running undercurrent of hints about the upcoming avengers movie (totally awesome), which adds an element of mystery to the movie where you'll find yourself constantly looking for tidbits or blurbs about the upcoming and totally awesome movie we're all waiting for with bated breath. I

I've never been big on monster movies, I think mostly because all the good ones came before my time. However, as cinema begins to hearken back to the ideas of yesteryear, things end up getting reused with a more contemporary paint job (circa Poseidon (1970), The Italian Job (1969), Gone in 60 seconds (1974), Assault on Precinct 13 (1976) etc.). Now sometimes this works because the original concept was good, but the technology just didn't exist at the time to give truest form to the idea being expressed. Obviously there are twice as many examples of movie remakes that were tremendous flops, demonstrating only the lack of creativity and originality present within much of Hollywood. However, once in a while they manage to get things right. As I said in the beginning, I'm not big on monster movies, but I feel that fan or not, this movie was a very well executed example of the genre. The setting is atmospheric, the characters, while a little one dimensional, are believable, the

Who screams for ice cream? I DO!! The trailer looked interesting, I'll give it that. The premise made me shake my head though. God decides humanity has to go. Only 6 people with a trunk full of automatic weapons stand against the full might of the Almighty. So they're cinders at the end, right? Nope. Nooo, nooo nooo. No sir. Not at all. As it turns out, angels are pretty vulnerable to bullets. And most of all, headlocks! Seriously, you can darn near kill an angel with a headlock! True story film bro! So. God has had it with Man. That God you heard about who destroyed cities with angels? Well, apparently God is all out of those guys. Michael the Arch Angel has decided he doesn't care for God's new plan of action. He falls to earth, cuts off his wings, grabs a ton of guns and heads out on the road. Out in the middle nowhere, with a dollop of desert scenery, six decent actors humans with completely boring stories, flaws, and unexplainable motives are in a diner. One of