Benz Eye View: Detective Chinatown 2

Detective Chinatown 2

Pros: 

1.) This movie has so much absurdity, and it embraces it well.  When the movie becomes silly, it goes out as much as it can to the point of ridiculousness.  To put it simply, it is funny, especially when it comes to certain sequences (i.e. chase sequences).  They are the most enjoyable parts in this movie…

 

Cons: 

1.) …However, with all this comedy and absurdity in the movie, it does not really mix well tonally with its serious moments.  It can be done since many movies can mix serious and comedic tones, but it does not really work here since comparing the two tones is like comparing a hardcore drama to a children’s cartoon (or for a better comparison, combining The Dark Knight and Dumb and Dumber into a movie).  Have the movie be tonally equal, and it will get better.

2.) Near the beginning of the second act, I found some of the editing to be quite atrocious.  The number of cuts in between shots makes the scenes (particularly the chase scenes) nauseating.  The editing does get better as it progresses, but it certainly reminds of Railroad Tigers and its slightly unbearable editing in the beginning.

3.) With all the mystery and action coming to the end, I found the climax to be anti-climactic.  When the movie reaches that climax, how it was resolved was a cheap way to end the mystery and progression that these characters went through.  I did not expect to have a powerful climax like an MCU film, but I expected better than what I saw.

 

Overall: 

You may have never heard of Detective Chinatown.  Well, neither have I.  I saw it on the list of movies showing in theaters, and I was not in the mood to watch any of the new American movies that were just released, so I chose this Chinese movie instead.  Firstly, I can safely say you do not have to see the first movie to understand what is going on in this movie (as far as I can tell, there are a couple of references to the original movie, but does not really impact the main plot of the second one).  Secondly, this is one of the most absurd movies I have ever seen, and I like it.  The one thing that really stands out about this movie is the comedy…and that is about it.  The story and plot are average, the action is decent, and the actors did well in their roles (especially one actor playing a certain character that I will not give away, because it was actually funny how they depicted this character over how many other certain late-night shows depicted him).  Nothing else about this movie really stands out, so if you want to watch something different these days (particularly if you are tired of watching American movies right now), then this a good choice to watch.

6/10

Benz Eye View: Black Panther

Black Panther

Pros: 

1.) I really like many of the production and costume designs.  It is very unique to the setting of the film, and makes it stand out over any of the other MCU films.  Compare it to Asgard from the Thor movies.  They also have great production and costume designs, but Black Panther seems to go all out in this next MCU film.  The filmmakers were determined to get this right…

2.) …Especially since the world of Wakanda looks beautiful.  Just like the world of Asgard or the magic of the Ancient One, this new area of the MCU stands out more than any of the others due to showing a huge amount of screen time on its culture, actions, and the previously mentioned production and costume designs. There are many other factors on how Wakanda (and this film) stands out over the other MCU films, but for this pro, its establishment of this nation is glorious.

3.) The majority of the characters are interesting and fleshed out.  Many of them (including Black Panther) have a role that is necessary to the film.  However, the one character that I believe that deserves attention is the main antagonist, Erik Stevens a.k.a. Killmonger.  He is a rare sight in the MCU, because he is a very interesting antagonist with great motivation to his actions.  Other than Loki, who do you remember in the MCU is a great well-written antagonist?  At best, Vulture and maybe Ultron, but nobody else.  Overall, great characters that are well-written and enjoyable…

 

Cons: 

1.) …However, there are a couple of characters that this film uses as a big deal when they are really unnecessary.  I will not say who they are, but I can easily write these characters off, replace them with already existing characters, and it will not have much consequence.  One character that eventually dies by the end of the second act has a brief emotional moment for the other characters, but my response was this, “Who was this guy again?”  It is due to the fact that the film barely had him do anything and has little character.  Erase some of these characters, and the film will do just fine.

2.) The CG and green screen effects stand out so many times.  It is not to say that it is bad.  In fact, there are plenty of moments where they are implemented well.  However, the biggest area where the CG and green screen effects really stand out badly is by the third act.  Real-life actors do not blend in with those effects, especially with T’Challa and Killmonger.  Marvel Studios probably needs to get their special effects team their act together and be consistent with their work.

3.) Another thing that needs work is the action cinematography.  There are so many action moments that have the camera shots that are close up combined with rapid cuts that I can barely see the action.  Certain action scenes take place in the dark, and I can barely see what is going on (to be fair, some of it is supposed to be that dark).  I like to see the action, so please hold still for a moment other than an obviously-CG fighting scene.

 

Overall: 

With the coming of the next MCU film, Black Panther has received so much attention.  Some say it is because he is the first black superhero to be created in the movie screen.

Despite having the Blade trilogy a few years ago…

…Or Spawn…

…Or this guy for that matter.

 

 

 

 

 

Others say it has cultural and political aspects on why this film is significant.  However, I am not going to get to that, because I am reviewing this as a film, and I am not in the mood for a debate on its cultural/political significance.  Is this film actually good by most (if not all) of the critics, and the hype worth it?  I can safely say that this film is great.  While Black Panther will stand out for a multitude of reasons, it will undoubtedly be an entertaining film for everyone.  Is it a perfect film like so many critics have said?  No, this is an example of over-hyping a film before it comes out.  The story and plot are generic, but executed very well.  There are some amazing fight scenes, but some of it suffers with excessive CG and troublesome cinematography.  The world of Wakanda and its hero is enjoyable, but stop saying that he will have a huge impact when it is just a superhero film.  Whether you see it for the reasons I mentioned before or just another part of the MCU, you will have to admit that this is an entertaining yet different film nonetheless.  Consider it a great preparation for the upcoming Avengers: Infinity War.

8/10

Benz Eye View: The 15:17 to Paris

The 15:17 to Paris

Pros: 

1.) I believe that this movie did a pretty good job showing some of the military culture/classes.  While those scenes are brief, I appreciate how it shows the military doing more than just shooting targets; they also show medical and knitting procedures.  It gives some huge respect to the military, and I like that.

2.) The friendship and camaraderie between the three main leads: Spencer Stone, Anthony Sadler, and Alex Skarlatos is strong here.  While not as strong as I would have liked (since the movie spends more time with one main character over the other two), the movie does a good job showing how close these three friends are ever since they were children.  Their friendship carries them out through adulthood, particularly in the 2015 Thalys train attack.

3.) The best part of the movie is the 2015 Thalys train attack.  The tension of a terrorist attacking innocent people in the train only for the three main leads interfering will excite people in the movie theater, and it is one sequence that everyone is looking forward the most…

 

Cons: 

1.) …It is unfortunate that the attack itself does not occur until the end of the movie, specifically when the third act begins.  It is by far the best part of the movie, and it is advertised as such, but it is too short to have anyone enjoy it…

2.) …I would not really mind it that much, but the other problem is that this movie is a huge slog to go through.  The movie spends its time showing the lives of the three main leads (technically, two or one of them since the third barely gets enough screen time) from the childhoods to their times in the military to the Euro trip to the train attack.  It is not necessary to show their entire lives, only the ones that are necessary to watch.  There are characters who are introduced into the movie as seemingly somewhat important, but they disappear and are never seen again.  Certain moments in the movie that happen are either not shown (which is preferable) or not explained.  This is not exactly great writing here, especially since this is a character study movie.

3.) It is nice that they brought in the actual heroes (Spencer Stone, Anthony Sadler, and Alex Skarlatos) to play themselves, but they need more acting lessons.  While they play together and during the train attack, this is when their acting does a decent job.  However, everywhere else is either adequate or below average.  They are not terrible, but I cannot imagine these guys having acting careers anytime soon.

 

Overall: 

On August 21, 2015, there was an attack on the Thalys train that was prevented by three men: Spencer Stone, Anthony Sadler, and Alex Skarlatos (and also Chris Norman, but the movie did not really include him until the attack sequence).  We have a movie about these three men, and their involvement on the 2015 Thalys train attack, and it is such a slog to go through.  This is not one of Clint Eastwood’s best movies; the main leads need more acting lessons, the movie itself takes its sweet time to reach the best part of the movie, and most of the events before the train attack are not really necessary.  In fact, I argue it would have been better of this was a short film rather than an hour and thirty-four-minute movie.  It would avoid the needless padding and exposition.  As it stands, the movie is a nice tribute to the heroes who prevented the 2015 Thalys train attack, but it is not exactly the one to spend an hour and thirty-four minutes to wait for the best part in the movie.

4/10

I will say that I do congratulate those men who did prevent the attack, and I salute to them.

To Spencer Stone, Anthony Sadler, and Alex Skarlatos (and Chris Norman), great job on protecting those people in the train.  

Benz Eye View in Stardust Update

Hey, everyone!

A small update with my Stardust profile.  I screwed up with my login, and I can no longer reach my original profile BenzEyeView.  As a result, I am making a new profile under the name BenzEyeView2.  I apologize if I have not updated my reactions in the old profile, it is now currently in the new one.

Once again, I am no longer under the profile BenzEyeView.

I am now under the new profile BenzEyeView2.

Once again, I apologize for the confusion, and I hope you have a great day.

– Benz Eye View

UPDATE: As of June 2, 2021, the Stardust app has shut down.  I do have my recorded reviews, and I am considering uploading them on my YouTube channel.  If I am, I will let you know when I uploaded all of them.

Benz Eye View: The Cloverfield Paradox

 

The Cloverfield Paradox

Pros: 

1.) All of the actors did great in their roles (except for Chris O’Dowd particularly in certain moments of the movie).  The one who deserves the most credit is Gugu Mbatha-Raw as Ava Hamilton.  There is one moment in the movie that devastates her character, but the actress gave her all in that emotional moment.  In fact, the best moments for the actress are the emotional moments.  Good to see that the acting is doing well for this movie (for the most part) like the previous film.

2.) Since this takes place in a space station, I do like the set design.  Not only does it fit the setting, it reminds me so much of many other sci-fi settings like the Nostromo in Alien or the Millennium Falcon in Star Wars.  Not only that, certain moments taking place in the station reminds me of many moments in other sci-fi movies.  For the sake of being vague just like the marketing did, I will not spoil what they are, but I believe any sci-fi fans (especially in the horror genre) will recognize some of the references.

3.) There is plenty of mysterious moments happening in the movie that helps any moviegoer get intrigued.  Certain things happen in the movie that you will question what is happening, and makes you want to stick around to know the answers alongside the other characters.  If the mystery is strong enough, you got yourself an audience.

 

Cons: 

1.) Around the first act, there is a foreshadowing moment in a news channel, and I end up predicting many things that will happen.  While I was right in some areas, it takes the other characters a while to figure out what happened.  For a bunch of scientists who are supposed to be smart, they are kind of dumb compared to a normal guy like me who is clearly of lower intelligence compared to those characters.  I am pretty sure that people smarter than me can easily piece together what is going to happen much faster and better than the characters in the movie.  In short, the characters are slightly dumb when solving what dire situation they are in.

2.) The main character, Ava Hamilton barely does anything until near the end of the second act.  She does assist the other characters in researching their scenarios and problems, but she does not really have much to do before the third act other than thinking about her family, and her internal reasoning she got involved in the space station does not get revealed until near the end of the second act (and even I guessed what it was easily).  While I do like Ava, her other co-workers take center stage of the movie until then.

3.) There are weird and mysterious events that happen in the movie as soon as the inciting incident occurs.  However, it only happens a few times than I would have hoped.  I cannot say much, because I like to be vague about it, but the threat that the main characters are dealing with gets interesting at first, but the appeal slowly dies out as time passes, and the characters become more concern on getting home than the mysterious threat happening.  That is disappointing to see, and I expected better.

 

Overall: 

Pretty interesting that this movie was marketed and released at the same day: The Super Bowl.  It has been ten years since the original Cloverfield movie came out and two years since 10 Cloverfield Lane.  Now out of the blue, a new Cloverfield movie sprung out and released in Netflix yesternight.  Does it hold out just like any of the other Cloverfield movies or any better?  All I can say is that it does well on its job: making a good movie about several people in a space station…I will let you figure out the rest by yourself.  It does keep in your feet to find out what is happening to these characters.  While I do not think it is the best out of the Cloverfield movies (that title belongs to 10 Cloverfield Lane), it is still a decent movie to watch on Netflix if you are looking for any movies to pass the time.  I do not know how this will affect the series (especially since another one is coming in a few months), but it might as well grab the attention of any Cloverfield fan until then.

7/10

For those who are wondering what this movie has to do with the original Cloverfield movie, I will not spoil it, but prepare yourself to be slightly disappointed.

Benz Eye View: Hostiles

Hostiles

Pros: 

1.) Of all the actors in this movie, the two who stand out the most are Christian Bale and Rosamund Pike.  With Bale, he plays a soldier with a tortured soul after losing so many of his fellow soldiers from a Native American chief that he is forced to escort back home, but he keeps his emotions inward and rarely ever shows it.  Pike plays an opposite of Bale’s character: a broken woman trying to piece herself back together after losing her family, and she slowly recovers over time.  Both of these performances deserve notice, and it is a shame that they did not even get a mention in this year’s Academy Awards.

2.) There are so many great shots of so many landscapes, you swear that they made this movie just to show off many parts of the nature of the USA.  It shows off how big of an arduous journey these characters have to go through to reach from point A to point B.  The movie shows off great shots nonetheless, and they are nice to look at when shown.

3.) The movie gives plenty of silence throughout its run-time.  While there are indeed sound, the use of little to no sound makes the tone eerie and depressing.  When there is a loud sound (usually thanks to a gunshot), the tone becomes alarming and cautious.  There is music, but it is used sparingly and only in the background to be barely noticed; fitting into the tone.  I give credit for the sound and music team for using them effectively.

 

Cons: 

1.) This is one long and slow movie, so this may not be for everyone.  While I argue that it is used effectively, I can see some people getting bored with this movie easily (especially since the movie is over two hours long).  It may not be a problem for you, but for some people, an overly-long movie that moves in a snail’s pace may be a problem.

2.) There is an interesting relationship between Joe and Yellow Hawk since Joe hates Yellow Hawk, because he killed many people including many of his fellow soldiers.  However, how the relationship was resolved was too easy.  The conflict between the two characters would go on until it is easily resolved near the midpoint.  I figured that the relationship between the two would grow and they forgive each other until the end of the movie, but I did not think it would be over that quickly.  I expected better with this sub-plot…

3.) …Speaking of sub-plots, a few of them I found to be unnecessary.  For the sake of spoilers, I will briefly talk about two of them.  One sub-plot occurs around the mid-point, which is that Joe and his men has to escort a disgraced soldier to go under court-martial and hanged.  This seems to be an unnecessary way to add more tension to the main plot and to kill off a couple more soldiers in the process.  The second sub-plot involves one of the soldiers going through PTSD.  I like the idea, but how it was resolved involves the previously-mentioned sub-plot, and it would have been better without it.  Remove some of the unnecessary sub-plots, and the movie will be slightly better.

 

Overall: 

Catching up with more movies from 2017, we have Hostiles, a Western movie about an Army captain escorting a dying Cheyenne war chief and his family back to Montana despite how much the captain has a grudge on the war chief since he killed his own fellow soldiers.  Not a bad premise, and the movie itself is not all bad either.  There are certainly things that stand out from this movie from certain actors to great scenery shots, but it is not enough for the movie itself to stand out.  Any Western fans will certainly have a joy out of this movie (the movie itself reminds me of Red Dead Redemption), while any average moviegoer may consider it a good distraction if there is nothing else to watch, which you may consider unless you want to see Winchester.

7/10