Thoughts on the 2017 Academy Awards

Sooooooo..... Its been a while, but give me a break, I'm a student.

As you are a hopefully person on earth, you know about the Steve Harvey style mixup that happened at the Oscars already, so I wont go into that now, it was an honest mistake that shouldn't've happened.

Instead, I shall ponder the awardation of awards to bad movies with one redeeming aspect. Should it be done?

I wont call any names, Suicide Squad knows who it is. But should it be outlawed to give bad movies awards in any category, since it rarely makes them no more enjoyable, and just shows studios that they can get praise if they get just one thing right. But I argue that its important to see aspects of movies as seperate parts, and the overall quality of the movie as the way those aspects fit together.

Suicide Squad won best make-up because the people who did it, put a lot of talent and effort into it, and they should receive some recognition for it, otherwise they will be showered with the same hate as the rest of the people making the film.

Captain America: Civil War

Well, there it is. Nothing in my life will ever come close to this. From now on things will just get progressively worse. 

They wont but this film was FUCKING AMAZING!!!

Picture this: the Winter Soldier, the Avengers and The Dark Knight had a child. It wouldnt come close to what this movie is. Everything I espected and more. Just great performances, just great action, just great characters, just great conflict, just great stuff, just great comedy, just great tragedy. It was all just so great!! The rest of the MCU is now in the corner wearing a dunce-hat for not being Civil War. Shame on you! 

There isn't much I can say without spoiling anything. So I'll wait 'til the worldwide release has gone by and make a little opinion-video ;) Just for you guys!

Zootopia

The Godfather, Breaking Bad, serious crimes against minorities. Things kids don't shouldn't see in movie-theaters. Yet they do, because Disney has masked it as an animal city-film. I ofcourse notice the subtle nods and hints 'cause I'm a grown-ass man! but kids don't, because kids, as has been well-documented, are dumb. Thats why we have schools. but enough of my bitterness, how is the latest Disney-film? It is amazing. That is it. It is well-cast, well-animated, well-written, well-paced and most importantly; well-made. Go take your kids to it, they'll love it. And if you have no kids of your own, Well, thats too bad, guess you'll have to go alone you loser.

But what was that beginning about? The part about serious crimes against minorities? It was about the main-plot of the film. In the town of Zootopia, there is a subtle class-system in place. You'll find it being very offensive if you replace the word "predator" with any minor group present in our society. You will likely feel rather offended. Thats why Zootopia works only in animated form, if it was live-action, the minority "predator" would have to be replaced with something real, like a racial, sexual or other type of minority. Hell, could even be a gender!

But ENOUGH!! says the Don, I think. Was that a line in any of the godfather films? I forget. Tomorrow I will deliver a review of what shall surely be better than any of those insomsia-cures. Captain America: Civil War!!!!1!!!!1!!!!!!!111111 So look forward to that! NO SPOILERS, Promise =)

The Revenant

The Revenant, if you noticed, won a few prizes. Including an Oscar to Leonardo DiCaprio. Wich you knew because theres no way you missed the singularity forming where the internet used to be. And the film won all of the awards for good reason too! It was so amazing that if I wasnt a student without a job, I'd see it again. But the one time was enough for me to tell you how amazing it actually was.

Extremely

Moving on; The directing and cinematography were so great that they both won oscars. The filming was so great that the every single shot, some lasting several minutes, is like real life, wich it was. The director opted to shoot only in natural light, on location and with real snow! Thats amazing because snow is a nightmare to work with.

The film follows Hugh Glass as he goes through the average Finnish commute. First being attacked by Native Americans and forced to leg with 5 other guys, Then being attacked by a bear, and left for dead by Tom Hardy. But the wrath of Hugh is furious as this Glass is the type used for windshields. Glass crawls for safety and gets in some deep shit along the way. And thats the majority of the film.

The Story was exectuted in an amazing way. And I rarely say that about anything. With combined with the award-winning acting by both Leonardo and Tom, the final product looks like a documentary following a broken man on his quest for vengeance!

While the film is Amazing, was real life more badass once again. Not only did mr. Glass not actually stand upright during his journey, he also didnt receive help chasing away wolves. And also the bear tore off the skin from his back, exposing his ribcage.

The film does have to bend the rules a bit, so its excused. However there is one glaring error I must address: Bears hibrenate in the winter, cubs are born during this time, and accompany the mother for a bit over a year. Thats an inexcusable error by the writers. But I guess they needed a reason for the bear to attack.

Deadpool

Am I late??

Oh Shit!!

Whatever! Lets review this thing!!

Ever since the leaked test-footage a few years back, everyones been anxious for a deadpool movie. Wich we now have. And its Amazing with a capital A! No one thought there would be a market for an R-rated comic-book movie about a foul-mouthed superantihero. But then it came out and broke all the walls (Like, 16 of them) and box-office records. And while a lot of it can be attributed to marketing, is the movie itself so good that it couldve done so without it.

Not much more can be said about it that hasn't already been said. Ryan Reynolds nails his role and the writing is phenomenal. The supporting cast is amazing in their roles and the effects are decent. While a great many old people think of this film as an abomination, I personally like to think of it as an example to other films that as long as its good, it doesnt have to be stripped of all the action to be succesfull. Thanks to this film the next wolverine-film might be R-rated and actually edgy for a change.

I personally cant wait for the next one. Hopefully Fox wont cut the budget for it like it did for this one. At least the worked around it brilliantly.

The Hateful Eight

Skit can be found here =)

Quentin Tarantino is often accused of plagiarising his own and other peoples work. And the H8ful 8 is no exeption! This time the master of violence has stolen the plot from Agatha Christie and the structure from himself. Yes, its a good and entertaining film and all that crap, but theres alot of riding on the Tarantino name alone, and the focus appears to have been to make a tribute to firstly westerns and secondly to Tarantinos earlier work. Things like shooting in 70 mm and using the old-fashioned method of repeating every frame to make a slow-mo shot.

But enough of this complaining! The movie kicked some serious butt!!! It truly was like an Agatha Christie novel with its tense and gripping moments of intensity and violence. Even though there are in fact 9 hateful people going all internet-comment-section on eachother and murderizing eachother to shit! I wont spoil anything but imagine a cross between Then there were none, Murder on the orient express, Reservoir dogs and a western, you're pretty close to what this film basically is.

The production desing was perfect, the set, the costuming, the oscar-nominated score..... And the casting couldnt have been better, in the end, you truly hate each and every one of the characters, wich I suppose was the goal, and still not spoiling anything, the murders are pretty inventive and awsome. It was in fact so filled to the brim with gore that I was rubbing my face for pieces of intestens for a few hours after leaving the theatre. So fair warning about that.

If you go see this movie, you will not be dissappointed or bored, for while it feels long, it doesnt feel like it drags. Wich is perfect, given that its over 3 hours long. So go see this incredibly grotesque and potentially traumatizing film, you will enjoy it very much.

Star Wars: The Force Awakens..... On second thoughts. And also spoilers :)

Remember a while ago when I bashed Star Wars to the ground? Well I was wrong, about some things. Most of the arguments I made still stand, but what I did was focus solely on them, instead of the good stuff, wich there is a lot of. Most things in fact are very good, and after seeing it another twenty-eight times, I've decided to write about all the amazing stuff that I expirienced while viewing this movie.

Well obviously this.

But other than that: All of this stuff: TR-8R, BB-8, FN-2187, 3D......
But seriously for a change, BB-8 was the most awsome orange and white ball I have ever seen

He (?) was just the coolest thing that the production team could have come up with, while not being an R2-D2 replacment, and if the story about Simon Pegg's daughter befriending the onset robot is true, it makes him all the more awsome. And the way his roundness was used for visual humor made him something that was lacking from the prequels, a fun character. 

Serious characters, there were some, like Tarkin jr. I mean Hux! And Captain Phasma, the third in a proud tradition of looking cool, while at the same time doing jack-shit. But someone I really want to talk about (for now), is Kylo Ren, or should I say, Ben Solo? I wont, but still. Now that I've given it some thought, Kylo was an extremely deep and intresting character, leaving me to think what would have happened to Luke should he have chosen the path of the dark side. He was clearly a woulrenable boy, not knowing what to do, and therefore choosing to follow the strongest and smartest one around.

Speaking of whom: heres a theory on who Supremeleader Snoke is!!!!

According to my theory; he is Emperor Palpatine. Heres the evidence: His disfigurments recemble being  very badly burned, or electrocuted, like Palpatine was, twice. Palpatines body was never found, he was a storng force-user, he could have survived and escaped that drop. If he was the apprentice of  Darth Plagueis, he might have known how to survive death. Thats all I've got to be honest. Its not a very good theory. Anyways, I'l be back with a new review sometime wednesday when the H8ful Eight finally comes out in Finland. 

2015 What is Film Awards

Skit coming, too busy at the moment.

2015 is over, but before we dive face first into the cloud of unearned optimism that is 2016, lets look back at the best, worst, and the mediocheriest films of last year. There are howerver many categories I came up with while writing this. Also keep in mind that not only did I not see all films,  and some werent released in Finland yet. And I'm including films I didnt review. Hold on to your butts!

Action
Best:
I didnt have to think about this too much, While there were many good action films this year, like the fun Kingsmen and the total parody Spy, this award goes straight to Mad Max: Fury Road! The absolutely epic awsomenesplosion delivered what I wanted, and destroyed my low expectations! I so cant wait for the 3 other films in the series in wich Tom Hardy has been singed up for.
Worst: 
Terminator Genisys, move along.
Mediocheriest:
This I had to think about for a bit, but ultimately decided to not include a "mediocher" cathegory.

Actors
Best: 
There were many good ones to choose from, Tom Hardy in Legend, Tom Hardy in Mad max, Tom Hardy in Legend, again. But I ultimately went with Tom Hardy as Ronald Kray in Lengend, he completely sold both of his performances as the crime-lord twins, But in my opinion, the mentally challengend Ronnie was the better one.
Worst:
Ugh, Idk, Jai Courteny in Terminator Genisys.

Comic-book movies
Best:
There were two Marvel films last year. Of those two, One was great, and the other amazing. Avengers: Age of Ultron was slightly better than Antman.  Sorry, but without Edgar Wright, it feels like the director that was brought in just tried to copy his style, not quite nailing it.
Worst:
Fant4stic, Fuck that film, needing the rights is no excuse for a lowsy film, Fox!

Eurm.. Effects
Best:
While films like The Martian and The Walk looked really good, I feel like Star Wars: The Force Awakens blended CGI with practicality the best. With perhaps too much overshadowing of the CG, making some characters really stand out as badly done.
Worst:
FantFourStic, I dont want to talk about it anymore.

Score
Best:
I went mad trying to think of the worst- pick in this category, the best one was Mad Max; Fury Road!!!!!!
Worst:
I dont know, didnt listen, probably Terminator genisys or Fant2+2stic.

Worst Film of 2015
Fant4stic four, stop asking me about these things.

Best Film of 2015
There were so many great..hahahahahahaaa, Couldnt even write it with a straight face. There were some great movies this year, Legend, Star Wars, The Walk, Jurassic world..... (these are honorable mentions I've just decided) But only one can be the best!!! And if you know anything about patterns, you will know that it was:

This film

Here's to a good film year! Let us hope 2016 also has some good movies!

The Girl King

Remember way-back-when when I wished for a movie about a gay princess? Well here it is! only this is very much not a disney-film. So very much not. And since I saw it with my grandparents, I am now dead. The Girl King is a Finnish/Swedish film about Queen Kristina of Sweden, and her life as the titular "Girl-King". And seeing as how she was a strong indipendent woman who didnt need no man! she of course is a great ruler, right? WRONG! she is torn between being a good queen, and embrasing herself. See back in the 17th century, it was not suitable for a queen not to have an heir to the throne.

But enought about the story! How was the film itself? It was fairly "meh". Some things were good, like the props. Other things were not good, like the acting and pacing. The actors clearly struggled to not sound like rally-drivers, but failed miserably. Mika Kaurismäki, brother of Spielbergs Finnish counterpart; Tapani Spiilperkkilä. Tries to make this a great historical epic, but the finished product is rushed, drags at ome points, uses the wrong gimmicks at the wrong points, goes for shock-value over actual emotion..... I could go on listing the things that are wrong, but I wont. Its a finnish movie made in English. They are generally fairly bad, for example Iron Sky. Fun, but lacked any deeper meaning. This is that again, slighty better maybe, but dont see it with your grandparents. The lesbian-part of Kristinas story is explored fairly graphically.

And since people were shorter 400 years ago, and this was filmed in real castles, everyone crouches in doorways like theyre Bigfoot.

Star Wars: The Force Awakens

Oh boy, I'm going to be publicly lynched won't I? 

Ok so I enjoyed it, it was a fun movie, but the story, the villains and everything else just felt off. Look, I didnt like the handling of things, it dragged, there were too many characthers, everything is a Deus Ex Machina, the force is handled stupidly, Kylo Ren is a whiny teen-ager, the megaweapon in the poster isn't used in such of an intresting way. Three quarters of the film is fanservice, the movie is crowded...... Now, I could go on telling you all the things wrong with the film. But thats not going to stop you from seeing it will it? You will likely go see it 5 times, I know I might actually see this again. It was fun. So ignore what I say like everyone else, and go see it, Its still Star Wars. And Lightyears better than the prequels. But I hope the two announced follow-ups are better.

Bridge of spies

Despite my jokes on twitter, I absolutely loved Bridge of Spies. But I just dont know how to review it, nor do I think I should. The movie is its own best compliment, it needs no more praise than what you see on the screen, it is clear Spielberg poured his everything into this picture, and thats what it is. A picture. Every shot, every scene, every camera-move, every line-delivery everything, is the absolute best it could be. I wont even tell you about how the story is a master-piece, or how the characters seize to be Tom Hanks or Mark Rylance putting on a mask. Theyre people. One absolutely does not lose intrest in this film, every scene is important, every scene has the actors putting themselves in the shoes of the real person they play, every set, is like watching an extremely detailed train-model or dollhouse, every set looks just as detailed, no matter how little of a part it plays. Every set, is lit perfectly, every light, is natural, it comes from a real source in the fictional world. All this, combined, becomes more than just the sum of its parts, its....... I cant even think of a word. Just do yourself a favour, and go see this film, not only will you get an expirience of wich every second you could hang in an art-gallery. You might also learn something about history.

Independence day and why it might actually be pretty good

Not great, though. How many sequels released decades after the previous one have been that amazing? Jurassic World was cool, Terminators since the second one have been progressively worse, I barely need to remind people about the prequels, Riddick was a thing and lastly, Indiana Jones we waited nearly 20 years for, only to find it to be absolute horseshit.

But why am I optimistic for Independence day? Because the original wasn't exactly the next Star Wars, but still a good film that I like to occasionally re-watch. The bar isnt too high, it'll be pretty easy to make something thats atleast on par with the original. The second reason for my liking the idea, is its similarity in premise with Jurassic World, its a continuation in real time, telling us what the world might be like if there really was an alien-invasion 20 years ago. Thirdly and most importantly, it has Jeff Goldblum!!! What more would, uh, you, um, want? Will Mith isnt here but who cares? Goldblums Dad is here! whatever his name was.

Batman v Superman and why it might not be that great

No spoilers here, in the trailer, yes.

We got a new trailer for BvS, and the internet stood divided, pondering its next move. But here's my opinion on the matter; At this time, I believe that the movie has a bigger possibility of being bad than good, why? Because the trailer shows so much. That tells us that Warner bros. doesn't think its getting enough people in the seats with just bats and supes. But of course it will!! Yet the company doesnt have enough fate in the project, trying to appeal to fans of every single character in the film. And by putting all those characters in, they are making it obvious that they need the hype around every one of them. And the movie gets crowded like that.

But thats not the only reason to be worried for the film. Jessie Eisenberg's performance reminded me of Michael Cera as himself. He is just too teenage-y and naive to convince me that he is the biggest nemesis of the alien-god that is Superman. And his hair looks like its from American Ultra

Jurassic Park and the one thing missing from it, but is overused in Jurassic World

Excuse the long title, but it is the shorted version of it, that I could abbriviate it to.

I didn't actually go and check this, but as is common knowledge, I am never wrong. But in Jurassic Park, there is one thing noticebly missing, overhead, helicopter shots, with the only one being at the beginning when the characters are on the helicopter. All other scenes are from the viewpoint of someone who could be standing around. And all scenes revolve around a character, showing only things they know. None of the scenes take place in a setting that any of the characters could observe. Similar to Shaun of the Dead, nothing they doesn't know, is show, But in Jurassic World these types of scenes are everywhere. I guess, it's been a few months since I last saw either of these, and I'm writing this only becauese I am a) bored, and b) had this idea in my head for a few days. And I had that VS. poster made. So scroll down, theres better content under this one, I guess.

Interstellar and why movies need sad scenes in them

Warning! spoilers for Interstellar in the video below.

inertstellar ending reaction video

What you just saw was a recreation of me watching Interstellar. Only with me replaced with an actor, one can barely tell the difference. But back to topic here. Sad scenes are plentyful in movies, but only if they're done well, will they actually make the audience cry. Such is the case in many Disney/Pixar films. Here's a few examples of this phenomenon:

Montage of sadness

And what do all those scenes have in common? They make me, an "adult" person, cry like a little baby. And besides that, there are very few aspects that would be similar. Its the context of the scene that makes it sad, with the right set up, anything could be made so sad that Kirsten Steward would show a hint of emotion.

There are of course many things that go to making a scene so sad that you think your childhood is over.  For example, the death of bambi's mom. I never saw the whole movie, but on a school field trip, my teacher put it on, we only saw the very beginning and the other kids would tell me that she dies. Just the idea of it made me so sad, that I would lock myself in my room for a day. Now that is effective character-building at its finest. Another way to improve a sad scene is music. (while writing this, I'm listening to the soundtrack of Interstellar and I feel like I'll never be happy again)  For instance, Mufasas death: the music penetrates your heart like a sword and chruses your soul like a million wildebeests. For a lot of you, it might be the music that sets of the memory, not the image.

Now thats all great and all but why do movies have to totally annhiliate us with their perfectly composed scenes and absolutely murderising scores? To teach us. If we didn't learn how to act in a certain situation, we wouldnt be that great as people. It's the same reason we play house, or police and robber. Only we learn different things, with house, its how to cook, clean etc. with police and robber its right and wrong, with movies, its emotions. Practicing human interaction in the controlled enviroment of a movie theatre or living-room couch. If we didnt know how to react to negative emotion, we'd become, in essance, psychopaths, not knowing how to associate emotions with situations, and not knowing how to read those emotions off of others. So maybe we should expose ourselves to these feelings. Just to grow as people. And it wont traumatize you, I give you my 75% propability word. So go watch that movie that made you cry as a kid again. You might learn something about yourself, and while it might not make you cry anymore, maybe you'll realize that you've grown out of it. So wheter its the Fox and the Hound, Up, or Monters Inc. you should watch it. Its healty.

Go check out my friends youtube channel he helped with the editing

 >>>>JohnnyBoii<<<<

Civil war and why Captain America is better than Iron Man

We just got a trailer for Captain America: Civil War, and we found out a lot of new things about the movie, wich is the purpouse of a trailer. But rather than do the obvious, wich is talking about the trailer, I will explain why as a person/character, Steve Rogers or, Captain America, is better than Tony "dickhead" Stark. First, lets look at their villains. More specifically, the opening monologue of Iron Man 3. why? because in it Tony says; "everyone creates the thing they dread". Wich we will take as fact in the Marvel universe. That means, that a) Tony is afraid of his enemies and b) he created them. Wich he did! Every villain exept for Whiplash, that his father created. So to conclude: Tony destroys his villains because they were his fault. But what about Steve? His villains include: Hydra and Shield, both goverment orginazations, and evil. So it makes sence why he wouldn't want to register. He didn't create those villains, he fights them, because its the right thing, unlike Tony who does it in order to not look bad. 

So Cap is better duh, hes a nice guy doing what's right, not an asshole cleaning up his own mess. And when he gets some alien tech, he destroys it, not what Tony did, wich was create Skynet and then, do it again. He was lucky that the second one was nice and british, but he didnt know!

The Walk

This is NOT the sad, drowned in a swamp of sadness post I have been teasing on twitter, it is however something. And its a review of the rather good film, the Walk. So lets review this thing. 

To be honest, I was exited for this movie. Robert Zemechis, Joseph Gordon-Lewitt, the 70's. All things I like, and found out, are not the main-point of the film. Rather, The charcter of Philippe Petit, the Frenceiest guy you can find, whom decides one day to walk accross the then uncompleted Twin towers. The movie then is divided into three clearly definable segments, or acts, if you will: the first is a traditional French film, stylized, colourfull, shot in a certain way (the french way) and it really reminded me of the works of Jaques Tati, who pioneered movie-making. The second act is the longest one, playing out like a heist-movie, with its tensity so thick you could slice it up and serve it on a piece of baquette, you really feel like things could go wrong. The third part is the "climax", most films have one, for exeptions, see the first half of any book-movie divided into two parts. No spoilers here so lets move on.

The style; as said, it shifts like loose cargo on a finnish train, but it fits the setting and feelings the characters go through, the beginning is like a dream, almost surreal, for when things are going well, the middle is dark and tense to reflect the stress and uneasyness. And the end is realistic to grasp the *gravity* of the situation. No? Moving on! The cinematography is unbeliavably beautiful, making things look either realistic, tense or surreal, whatever the scene needs, and the direction of Zemeckis is flawless as always, expect the same kind of Oscar-material as in Forrest Gump. The score is nothing special but you dont notice it being bad either. The cast is comprised mainly of Hobbit-rejects, seeing as how everyone seems to have the physiqye of a 12-year-old. Maybe thats just me since I am a 6'2'' sentient muscle. 

Since pointing out differences between an adaptation of a book based on a true story and real life seem to be a thing around here nowadays, heres some of them: Petit walked over the Sydney Harbour Bridge before WTC, he took reference photos with a helicopter. Those and at least three other things that actually happened were absent from the film. Cinema was born in France, so it makes sence that one of the best films I've seen this year is set there.

Legend

I was anticipating Legend for a long time, it had everything I liked, English accents, the 60's Tom Hardy, twice! and lets not forget the Gangster-themes. But then I went and saw it. And I was amazed at how good it actually was. Better than my already high expetations. But what made it good? what made it more than a gimmicy-, double-role movie.?

Well!

The story, it was great! While it felt like it dragged at some points, it made clear that it was necessary in order to make the emotional pay-off work. Telling the story of the Kray twins, the sensible and well-behaved Reginald, and the paranoid-schitzophrenic Ronald. Played by Tom Hardy and Tom Hardy respectively. The tale of the two brothers is balanced between the two, perhaps focusing more on Reggie and his wife, Frances. The first half of the film really reminded me of Lock, Stock and two smoking barrels, with its british wit, long suspensful shots, and the fpm being about 5. The second half however flips the tone on its head, not that thats a bad thing, it just comes unexpectedly, everything just gets darker from the beginning. 

The casting couldnt have been better, researching some old photographs of the real-life counterparts of the characters, they are spot on. And the acting by those dobbelgangers is perfect, feeling like real people and all delivering great performances. But about Tom Hardy, he is absolutely mindblowing in the movie. Usually with twin-movies where the same actor plays both siblings, its hard to tell apart wich is wich without context clues, thats why films like Parent Trap had the twins speak in different accents. Here though, the manorisms, look, walking style, voice, are all distinguishable, without being too different, I completely buy these two being two different people who happen to have the same face. The glasses were added to Ronnie, to make it easier for the audience, even though in real life, he didnt wear them. If Tom Hardy doesnt win the Oscar for best actor, I will be mad.

This being an adaptation of the book, The Profession of Violence: the Rise and Fall of the Kray Twins, there are a lot of inacruases, like Ronnie being gay instead of bi, Reggies second wife not even getting a mention, and the last words of some characters. All in all, Legend is worth going to see, while a bit dragging at times, you will no doubt have a good time watching it. 

Spectre

I was among the first in Finland to see this, and I saw it a week ahead of most of the world. But, to do so, I had to not sleep for a night, due to the fact that the screening was at seven minutes past midnight. While I was glad to see it, waking up at 3 PM just now, was pretty embaressing.

But this is a rewiev, not my autobiography, so lets get on with it! 

Spectre opens with a great action piece with bond having gone rogue again. After the great yet somewhat nightmarish title-song by Sam Smith, wich leads to a very good opening act. We get nods to stuff, intresting plotlines, an explonation to how Bond ot his Aston Martin in Skyfall. All very good stuff, but by the second act, the movie turns into a rushed collection of barely connected scenes made with the sole purpuose of more action set-pieces. And thats not even half of Spectres problems; Bond is much closer to the Roger Moore, goofy; Bond with an endless supply of quips and jokes. And alot of the elements seen in the trailers are wasted, underused or just bad. And some thigs happen only because they have to, and because they are things that were in the original movies. 

Even the Aston Martin DB10 is underused and extremely unintresting, partially because of the way its used. it only really has one scene, and in it, its placed in a parking lot with 53 other supercars, all of wich look exactly the same. 

There is however alot to see in this film, Q is back, and hes used extremely well, even getting his own actionscenes. Other returning characters are; Gareth Mallory, or M, Miss Moneypenny and for a few moments, Mr White, remember him? of course you dont, but he is important, for whatever reason. And then theres the big guy! We all know who he is, and what he is. Still the movie tries to hide this for the first hour and a half. And if you dont know, I wont spoil it. 

While not the best of the reboot-series, it also isnt the worst. so if you liked skyfalls look and atmospere, but preferred the stories of Casino Royale, but wished for a more human bond, then a) Why? and b) then this movie is for you! go see it if all this didnt out you off, its not the  worst movie to see right now.

How to make a Half Life- movie-series

If you follow my twitter and you dont but you should, you'd know that I'm a big fan of Half Life. And seeing as how the Half Life movie is still floating around, I decided to make this help ful guide to making a 4-part series of films. Keep in mind that I will spoil mostly everything.


First: lets look at the basic plots and titles for the movies. I'm not saying they should be this, but they are the best version of a script I've seen so far.

1. Half Life: Resonance
This one would be set during the first game and would follow the story of it pretty closely, the major difference I would make is to have Gordon Freeman and Adrian Shepard team up. At the end, Gordon would be transported to Xen, while Adrian is left behind and then reqruited by the G-man. In Xen, Gordon defeats Nihilianth and also gets put into stasis by mr. man.

2. Half Life: Suppression
Suppression would take place during the seven-hour war and would feature Adrian as the main character. This part of the lore is barely mentioned in the games, and ends in the Combine winning. And thats the point. Adrian is also never heard of again in the games, but the G-man appears to reference his failurre during the first dcene of Half Life 2. This could be a straight up war movie, happening maybe a few months after the events of Resonance. In the end, Adrian would of course die, or would he???

3. Half Life: Resistance
Aaaand were already at the start of the final few days in the Half life- timeline. Covering the expiriences that Gordon goes through between his arrival in City 17, all the way through to him leaving Ravenholm. So setting the scene for the rise of the resistance. This film should be droughted in loneliness, making any interaction between characters something important. Much like the game. Splitting the game into 2 movies, in this case, would make sense, it would provide a good narrative on its own, and setting the scene for the destruction of the Citadel in the next one. And making the end set in Ravenholm would be a great way of setting the tone of the final one.

4. Half Life: Anticitizen One
Speaking of the last one; here it is. maybe, well see. As the title implies, it  would be the second half of Half Life 2. Highway 17, Nova Prospect and the citadel would all be here, some parts would of course have to be stripped down, but a must is the game of chicken with the razor-train. Mostly retelling the game, The ending would naturally be: "Time, doctor Freeman?" And gordon being put into stasis. And the future of Earth left uncertain, Gordon waiting for his next assingment. The Episodes dont need movies yet. Conclusion to the games first, Dammit! These ideas arent, and probably shouldn't be what the movies will be, but this is a good start, make sure this gets to valve.

Here are the posters and some guidelines to the look and making of the movies, as well as tips and musts for making a half life movie

What comes to the tone and visual style of the motion-pictures. Look no further than Children of Men, with a similar setup and a perfect bleak European setting, Gordons bright-orange HEV-suit would really look like a symbol of hope and act as a strong contrast for the Combines filtered down and grey colours. The tone should be similar to the games, serious but with a spoonfull of humanity, a pinch of humor and a bucket of optimistic and fun characters. 

Tips and musts to making the a Half Life movie

-Dont wander too far from the source material, look what happened to the Far Cry movie. Sharing only the name with your source material is the biggest mistake you could make here.

-Victor Antonov. The desinger of the visual style and City 17. That is all.

-Get G-man right. G-man is the most mysterious character in all of gaming. Telling too much or too little would ruin the story and the narrative of the entire franchise. You should mostly stick to what we've seen from him in the games.

-Writing is key! If the story is great but the dialouge and pasing are horrible, youll be in trouble.

-Have someone from Valve look over.

- Make the relationships realistic, so like in the games

Casting and Directing and Writing

Techincally, you could cast anyone who looks the part as Gordon, but he should be playn simillary to Mad Max. Others are a bit harder, there are though some obvious choises; Morgan Freeman as Eli, Sean Connery as Wallace Breen and Rowan Atkinson as Odessa Cubbage. For the rest, hire Andy Serkis and mo-cap him for all I care. No real candidates come to mind. Maybe Edward Norton as Gordon, though he might be too old to play the 27-year-old MIT-graduate.

Writing could be done by the writers from valve, if they can do it properly, otherwise. Here I am!
Though J.J. Abrams was rumoured to be working with valve, his invovment in both star wars/trek, makes him basically impossible. Ridley Scotts visual directing and work on such movies as The Martian and Alien, make him my favourite. Guillermo Del Toro could also prove rather fitting for the rather surrealistic world of Half Life. And if you cant find any "good" ones; Alfonso Cuaron would most likely nail it.

And if youre only making one; make Suppression. But explain who Adrian Shepard at the start, Maybe a flashback during the G-mans mandatory speech.

Sorry for the long post but this is a subject that is very dear to me.