Conan: Khal Drogo speaks english

What: Conan the Barbarian

Who: Khal Drogo, Rachel Nichols, Stephen Land, Rose McGowan

When: August 19

Mastermind: Marcus Nispel

Before I start the review I'd like to share with you something I've discovered: Jason Momoa does not act. I wish I could tell you if he's a good actor or a bad actor but I can't because HE DOES NOT ACT. He never plays a character, he just shows up and does the only thing he knows how to do: he's himself. There is no Khal Drogo, no Conan, there is only Jason Momoa being Jason Momoa. He'll play barbarians until the day he dies because, well, look at him, he IS a barbarian, a modern barbarian, but a barbarian nonetheless.

I see you are skeptical. Don't believe me? Well, I've got proof.

Non english speaking barbarian

 English speaking barbarian

Futuristic barbarian

Hipster barbarian

Suited up barbarian

Now do you believe me? He's a barbarian. For cheese's sake, look at his eyebrows, the man has scars in strategic places! His surname is Momoa! He named his son Nakoa-Wolf, he has to be a barbarian (well, at least that's what I choose to believe in so shut up).

Well, anyway, Conan: the barbarian is a very silly film and should never, under any circumstance, be taken seriously. The plot is very meh and the lead female character is unspeakably annoying. The evil witch lady with the giant forehead was way more interesting than her. I would've been very happy if Tamara (that's the silly girl's name, I had to google it) really did end up being sacrificed (bad ass witch mothers are usually more interesting than blue-eyed (?) bimbos). 

The only sex scene in the film is very unfortunate. For some reason they feel the need to abandon their cosy pirate ship and have sex in a barn by sea full of hay and... diseases. Conan is also a regular Don Juan: he loves, then leaves. The film ends with Tamara and Conan saying goodbye, she couldn't possibly join him in his adventures even though she showed natural sword fighting skills because OH WAIT I HAVE NO IDEA.

And then there's the villain, the usual bad guy who kills the young hero's family and destroys his village thus providing him with the anger and motivation he needs to be a bad ass when he grows up. Also, following tradition, the bad guy has an opportunity to kill Jason (no Conan for you, you can't trick me) but he doesn't beacuse then the film would be 30 minutes long.

Rating: Meh (rather silly) 

It's thunder, bitches

What: Thor

When: May 6th

Who: Chris Hemsworth, Natalie Portman, Tom Hiddleston, Anthony Hopkins

Mastermind: Kenneth Branagh

I love superhero movies. Give me a masked dude in tights, a freak accident and a pretty girl and I'm all set. I really can't remember a superhero film I didn't like. I liked the Green Hornet, all the X-men movies and V for Vendetta is probably my favourite film of all time (OF ALL TIME). Thor is no different, I loved Thor. It's nice and shinny, it has great special effects and a plot that's not completely retarded (I really like it when plots aren't retarded). Anyway, I had really high expectations for this film mainly because it was directed by Kenneth Branagh and, as we all know, he's an Irish pie filled with creamy Shakespearean awesomeness.

"A superhero movie, you say? Directed by Kenneth Branagh? Well, butter my butt and call me a biscuit! Where do I sign?!"

Thankfully, Thor didn't disappoint. It's a really enjoyable movie. However, I have a few problems with the characters. I might love superhero films but I usually end up rooting for the villains.

Let me tell you about Thor. Thor is a big burly sort of fella who's not very smart and likes to smash stuff with his sidekick Mjolnir, the cosmic hammer. Naturally, Thor is blond, generically attractive and somewhat annoying. I believe he's the male equivalent of those ditsy and surgically enhanced girls who ride their pink scooters all around town with their freakishly small dogs and their overpriced handbags. The lights are on but nobody's home.

Anyway, Thor also has a brother named Loki who's not blond and appears to have a personality who turns out to be adopted (completely different gene pools... I should have known). Loki ends up playing the villain and if he had managed to scatter Thor's particles all across the universe using one of his worm-hole type thingies I would've been one happy camper.

Natalie Portman's character is also pretty sad. For someone who's supposed to be super smart she has no survival instincts whatsoever. Who, in the name of everythig that is holy, finds a crazy dude in the desert claming he came from space and decides to keep him? Women... that's who...

Rating: Oh yay!

Harry Potter and The Crappy McCrappyPants

What: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (Part II, I will not be reviewing part I because I am lazy)

When: July 15th

Who: All those people who were in the last seven films

Mastermind The Crappinator: David Yates

(Hey there. It's been a long time since my last review but I've finally decided to get off my ass and start doing something mildly productive (I have a very odd definition of "productive" so... yeah))

After seeing the final Harry Potter I've come to the conclusion that the universe has a very dark, twisted sense of humour. The universe is, in fact, a complete and utter dick. The universe hates me, it finds no joy in seeing people happy and I'm pretty sure that's why this film exists: to spread misery and sorrow throughout the land.

I loved pretty much all the Harry Potter films. Deathly Hallows part I was OK, nothing special, but I was totally fine with that because part II would surely blow my mind and make me pick up pieces of my skull from the floor. They promised me (and everyone else) pure, raw awesomeness to make up for all the camping and talking that happened in part I but instead I got a rather laughable and quite inaccurate adaptation of the last Harry Potter book.

I always thought adapting books into movies was hard. It must be very difficult to decide which parts to cut and which parts to keep. However, I will never understand the need these screenwriters have to pull stuff out of their asses. Why, in the name of all that is holy,  do they have to make stuff up? WHY? There's a book already, there's no need to put stuff in the movie that didn't really happened in the first place! Neville and Luna don't have any romantic relationship whatsoever. Neville marries the Abbott girl and Luna marries a random dude with an odd name. They don't marry each other! Sure, some fans would like to see some Luna/Neville action going on but doesn't mean screenwriters get to change the story. You don't see any Aragorn/Legolas involvement in Lord of the Rings, do you? And I'm pretty sure some people would like to see that... not me, of course...not really my cup of tea.

When I read that whole part about Snape's memories I cried my eyes out but the film adaptation just gave me the giggles.To be honest, most of the film gave me the giggles. It just took itself too seriously and ended up being silly instead of dark and dramatic. It's not bad film, it's just... a bit ridiculous.

I wouldn't go as far as to give it a negative review. It's not a bad film, the performances are pretty nice and the special effects are great but, as an adaptation, it sucks... big time.

So, if you're not a complete snob, such as myself, you'll enjoy this film very much. However, if you were blessed with the ability to be a complete prick, then you'll resent it for the rest of your days and be sad for a week just because the big bad movie people didn't produce exactly what you wanted.

There will be no "official" (lulz) rating because I'm too ambivalent.    

The stupid guys

What: The other guys

Who: Will Ferrell (hate him), Mark Whalberg (hate him too), Eva Mendes

When: August 2010

Mastermind IT HAS NONE

I hate Will Ferrell. I hate his guts. I hate his stupid face and his stupid curls and his stupid voice. I freaking hate Will Ferrell, that unfunny bastard, that sorry excuse for a comedian, that... giant handicapped woodchuck. You know, after I saw "Stranger than fiction" I was willing to give him a chance but I'm over that. I'm pretty sure Emma Thompson's presence was the only thing keeping him from sucking ass (which he does, on a regular basis).

"The other guys" reminds me of other spoofs like "Epic Movie" or "Date Movie" that are absolutely disgusting. After an hour and a half of it, honestly, I just wanted to shower... with bleach or... you know... ACID.
I do enjoy raunchy humour now and then but this is an abomination, a failed abortion! It's awful... and it makes me so very sad. Now, I'm not saying I didn't get e few giggles out of it, because I kinda did but as a whole, it's terrible. A 20 minute episode of "The Big Bang Theory" is a bajillion (yes, a bajillion, which is a lot more than a zillion) funnier than this blockbuster monstrosity.

Even the poster is stupid. Only mentally challenged thirty year olds and pre-pubescent boys could think this is actually a good film.

Rating: Pretty crappy

Paranormal activity my ass

What: Paranormal Activity 2

Who: Katie Featherston, Micah Sloat, Brian Boland, blah blah blah 

When: October 22nd

Mastermind: Tod Williams

Remember when I said I didn't like horror films? Well, if they're all like Paranormal Activity 2 you can forget I ever said that. Horror films don't scare me, they bore the crap out of me (although I don't know which is worse: being scared or bored out of my mind).

I was expecting really creepy stuff like sentences written in blood on the walls or a mutilated cat hanging from a chandelier but instead I got haunted cabinetry. Seriously? That's what's scaring people nowadays? Furniture? I have to say, I'm not impressed.

The first half of the film is really unfortunate. It's just a few random clips of people relaxing by a pool or taking care of their children. I understand they had to give us some kind of background story, they had to try to make us like those people so that, when they finally died, it'd be awful and heartbreaking. But, oh boy, that so didn't happen. By the time the "creepy" stuff started happening (which was after an hour of boring dialogue and choppy scenes) I was so fed up I was hoping they'd all just fall into a wood chipper and get it over with.

Unfortunately, when I say "creepy stuff" I don't mean their dog got turned inside out or some sort of evil spirit wrote quotes from the bible in blood (or any other bodily fluid, I'm not picky) on their walls. None of that. Something did happen to their dog, we just don't what. They mention it got sick (I believe they said something about a heart attack) and rush it off to the vet but the camera never shows what the evil demon spirit did to it. I like to think it just hid on a closet or something, waited for the dog to walk in from of it, jumped out, yelled "buh!" and scared the crap out of the poor thing.
In another scene, a teenage girl thinks she hears something outside and opens the front door, when she steps into the garden the door slams behind her... Ooohh spooky! A draft! Run for your lives! That scene was like twenty minutes long and it culminated in a slamming door, I wish I could ask for a refund or at least that they'd throw a axe murderer in there, it'd make the film so much better.

There's also a flying woman, a hovering baby, a whole lot of talking and a few fidgety pots and pans. But, really, whoever makes these films: just...stop, ok? Make something about unicorns, they're always a crowd-pleaser.

Rating: Pretty Crappy

(I know I promised to stop but... T-Meter critics... 60%? Really? Look at your life, look at your choices...)

Awesome sauce

ZOHMYGOODNESS! Have you seen it?! HAVE YOU SEEN IT, GOD DAMMIT?! It's...it's beautiful...

It looks absolutly amazing... I want it... NOW!

The Sorcerer's Apprentice

What: The Sorcerer's Apprentice

Who: Nicolas Cage, Jay Baruchel, Monica Bellucci, Alfred Molina, Teresa Palmer

When: July 14th

Mastermind: Jon Turtletaub

"The Sorcerer's Apprentice" is average... painfully average. It's...irrelevant. Sure, it's shinny, I mean, not Avatar shinny but it's ok. The special effects are pretty cool but, lets be honest, no one cares. Seriously, would you go to the cinema to watch Harry Potter's retarded third cousin who may or may not be slightly inbred? No, you wouldn't. Why? Because there's already an awesome wizard franchise out there and no one can pull a Harry Potter ("I'm a sorcerer?! But I'm just a normal and awkward little boy! Surely it can't be!" It's been done, love) apart from Harry Potter himself. One might try to argue that this film was based on a poem by Paul Dukas and that there's no sorcery school but it just feels... derivative.

The actors didn't help either. Jay Baruchel has fallen in the Michael Cera trap: he plays himself in every film. We get it, he's awkward, he's very pale, he's skinny, he has a high-pitched voice, he's a nerd/geek/dork, he gets the girl, blah blah blah. Seen it all before. And it's not only that, he's constantly bitching and moaning. "Oh, no thanks Mr. Magician Man, I don't want to have awesome super powers and shoot lighting out of my hands, no, sorry, don't want to save the world either. I'd rather just go on a date with a girl who thinks I'm crazy". Oh. My. God. Who does that?! He actually prefers chasing tail over learning how to created awesome force fields.

But, anyway, it wasn't that bad. Just pointless. I'll admit it was a good time, it had mildly good-looking people, cool(ish) special effects and I had a nice bucket of popcorn to keep me busy during Nicolas Cage's ill-written monologues.

(Did anyone notice that in the poster Nicolas Cage's character is wearing the ring that, apparently, only the super-duper-ultra-elusive Prime Merlinian could wear? What's up with that? Silly Nicolas Cage... you're not the Prime Merlinian get that ring off your finger!)

Rating: Meh