"Wendy? Darling? Light, of my life. I'm not gonna hurt ya. You didn't let me finish my sentence. I said, I'm not gonna hurt ya. I'm just going to bash your brains in."

A family is watching over a hotel for the winter. The father is slowly falling into madness, while his psychic son keeps seeing the horrible things that have happened in the hotel many years ago.

We decided to watch this last night when few of my friends were over, and since that was about 16-17 hours ago, I don't remember everything I thought while watching, but I will be trying my best with this review.

First of all, I haven't read the book. Well, I've read it, I just haven't finished it. The thing is, I don't like Stephen King. I like his short stories, but his novels just are too... well, I'd say "too complicated", but that's not the case. It's like he had tried to make them confusing and all that. The Shining is very hard to read. But the movie is not strictly base on it as the mini TV-show. In the movie, you can very much see Kubrick's ideas and what he's added to it. The novel has way too mane almost useless scenes and details, so it would be hard to make a film without leaving several things out of the movie. 

Jon S. Baird once said on Twitter, that so many movies would be much better, if they cut the useless stuff away and made it shorter. And I couldn't agree more, especially when we talk about The Shining. Kubrick made the movie so very very slow. There are scenes that happen twice slower than what's necessary. Of course I'm aware that it's an artistic decision, but it's frustrating. Of course things being slow can be a good thing in a horror film, but let's face it, the Japanese horror movies work that a lot better than American / British ones. And especially when you're watching a movie like The Shining with your friends, it's very frustrating. Last night everyone was practically screaming for the movie to pick up the pace and just get on with it. Some might argue that it's just because The Shining is a horror movie, and the slowness is frustrating because people are scared, but Id on't think that's it.

But is The Shining scary? I actually don't feel like it. It's distressing, yes, in a way thrillers are, but it's not scary. That's not necessarily a bad thing. But then again thinking about Kubrick's style making this movie makes The Shining seem more like an art film than a horror. That may also be because these days horror films are no way near art. Think about Paranormal Activity. They aren't made for the sake of art, but because of the makers simply crave for more and more dollars. You can definitely look at Kubrick's work an be almost sure that he wasn't in it for money.

I'd like to point out, that I like Kubrick's style very much. It might seem right now that I don't. I just don't think it suits with horror films, and his films can't be viewed as entertainment, they have to be viewed as art, and not everyone has the patience for that.

The characters are all very frustrating in this movie. I don't like any of the main characters, but how can anyone? Jack's just fucking insane, and when Wendy would have to do something, she spends time crying and panicking. I know, that's what most people would do in that kind of situation, but it's frustrating. That goes with every horror story with characters like this. My friend pointed out, that when Wendy sees how Jack flips, she never gets that adrenaline rush you could (or would) probably get. And of course then there's Danny who just... I don't know, his character makes me feel so distressed. He just sees things, and what's up with his imaginary friend Tony? I actually don't remember if there was something really important about Tony, him being even partly real, or was he just Danny's imagination? I don't know.

The actors did marvellous job, though. Jack Nicholson can always be so very terrifying. I don't like him as an actor though, not sure why. I feel bad for Shelley Duvall, though. If you read the trivia part on iMDB, you can see how shooting of the film must've been hard on her, and Kubrick definitely was way too, well, rough. I have one goof example, now let me quote

• "Kubrick insisted that Duvall and Nicholson perform the baseball bat scene 127 times, which broke a world record for the most retakes of a single movie scene with spoken dialogue" - Wikipedia (source)

I was going to quote the original article, but it didn't mention which scene. But if you've seen the movie, now you may understand why Shelley Duvall's character Wendy seems as hysterical as she does.

The music is also very interesting in The Shining. It's very distressing, just the way the music in horror movies is supposed to be. However, you know how music in horror films is kind of revealing? The way that the music tells that now something is going to happen, the music just tells it? Well, the soundtrack in this movie is different. It has those spikes that make you think now someone attacked someone, but nothing happens. Someone may just walk around carrying an axe, but when that certain spike comes in the music, nothing changes, it's the exact same scene, the exact same shot, there may not even be any kind of sudden movement. I think it's kind of interesting, and it's somewhat effective.

I'm not exactly sure how should I rate it. Artistically the movie is so great, the cinematography is amazing and the music is a spot on, and everything just clicks - as art. But when you look at the writing behind the movie, and the characters, and how the artistic side suits the story and genre, it just... doesn't click so much anymore. That's the interesting part about The Shining. So again, I'm not at all surprised if someone disagrees with me on this but this movie is really hard to rate. Like I need to think about both sides before I can think about the whole thing.

Of course I'd like to recommend The Shining, but if you don't like horror movies, then maybe not. However, if you do like horror movies, then maybe I still wouldn't recommend it. It's not like the horror movies now, the horror movies we see. It's something different. It's good to view it artistically, though. I have no idea how many people would do that.

☆☆☆☆☆☆

6 / 10

And oh, look at that, I wasn't sure if I'd write more than about three or four paragraphs but here we are.

"Chaos is what killed the dinosaurs, darling."

Veronica Sawyers is trying to be a part of the most popular girls. all called Heather, in school, when she meets J.D. They accidentally kill the most popular Heather, and they try to make it look like a suicide. J.D. however thinks one kill like this isn't enough.

I don't know why I decided to watch Heathers now. I guess I've been in Heathers -kind of mood for a while, I just didn't know if I'd watch it or not. I watched Clueless last night, but had nothing to say about it, so should I re-watch a movie and probably not write anything? Well, here I am writing, so at least I'm doing something.

And yes, I'm doing a review of Heathers again. I just truly love this movie and I have only seen it once, well twice now. It's such a cult-classic, and it's so wonderfully written. Heathers is so very quotable. There are so many phrases I'd like to start using on a daily basis: "How very", "Fuck me gently with a chainsaw", "What is your damage". All of those quotes are so fucking brilliant. They are awfully normal, but they still are somehow so great. True, many of these lines are usually used by soft-grunge blogs on Tumblr, and the quotes are usually surrounded by small moons and all kind of "grungy" symbols.

I actually noticed something this time, and didn't write about it last time. In Heathers suicide is sort of romanticised. No, not the way that audience would start romanticising suicide, but some characters are very much romanticising the shit out of suicide. Some people are even excited about suicides in the school, and then it actually becomes a sort of trend, it's sickening. And I thank the writers that Veronica thinks it's sickening. Otherwise this movie would be heartless and just inappropriate. But I think the way this movie handles suicide is one of the things that gives Heathers its disturbing charm. I don't know if that's a good thing or not, some may not like it, but somehow it makes this movie what it is.

Heathers may not be so girl-positive movie, which is actually a really nice thing about high school movies. It's wonderful when girls are friends and don't hate on each other. Veronica doesn't seem to like any of the Heathers, except maybe the cheerleader one a bit. Then again she did start to be sweet to her old friend and that girl who tried to commit suicide. But what about the guys? Most guys are showed as mindlessly horny, with two exceptions: that guy who tried to work for donations to Africa, and J.D. Well, J.D. didn't seem mindlessly horny, but then again he seemed like a total psycho.

I really like this movie, still. But it's just hard to come up with things to write in a review. It would be easier to do a proper analysis on some things, this is that kind of a movie. Still good, great even.

☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆

8 / 10

"What are you thinking? How are you feeling? What have we done to each other? What will we do?"

A woman goes missing, and it soon starts to seem as her husband had something to do with it. But she herself isn't so innocent after all...

I've seen a lot about this movie online, like on Tumblr etcetera. Most people seemed fascinated about this movie, but I didn't care that much - mostly bcause at that time I didn't like David Fincher that much. But then there was more photosets and edits of the movie, and it started to get more interesting. And now I've watched this.

The cinematography in this movie wasn't as good as in David Fincher's other movies, especially Fight Club. It was still good, but during the movie we focus more on the story than the cinematography, and in a film like this I understand that. It's still always nice to have something to look at - other than actors, you know. Music in this movie however was just as brilliant as in other Fincher's movies, and it was especially good for a thriller movies. It's always a big plus in a thriller or a drama, if it has someway unusual soundtrack, and not that basic strings-classical-orchestra-musi. In Gone Girl the soundtrack was absolutely perfect. Every moment of this movie was amplified by the amazing soundtrack.

I really love how Amy Dunne was portrayed. That's mostly because Hollywood seems to like one or two types of ladies in movies, and there isn't really anything special anywhere. Men get the best and most complicated roles, always. What's up with that? Well, Amy's character is absolutely unusual compared to the trope of the wife in movies. Her character was devious, pitiless, ingenious and in every way a well written character. Of course well written character doesn't always mean a good person, or a character you would like in a real life. However, well written characters usually are those who are most close to actual people. Of course I hope not many people in real life are like Amy, but it was absolutely fantastic to see well-written and different kind of female character in Hollywood movies.

Also Nick's character was interesting. He's not a good guy either, but he's also not as bad as everyone assumes. And what I love is in this movie you can't be exactly sure what said about Nick and Amy's marriage is true and what's not. Both of them have had their ways to alter the truth, with either lies or just confusion. And their marriage is something I... well I don't like it, but it's interesting. I think I could look into it better sometime.

☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆

9 / 10

"I trust everyone. It's the devil inside them I don't trust."

A team stealing gold is betrayed by their accomplice, who kills one of the members after running away with all the gold. Years after that, the same team hires the daughter of the killed member to steal the gold back.

That plot is almost impossible to explain without using the names (which is really annoying to do in a summary), because it just looks messy. But then again, the plot of The Italian Job is kind of messy and unrealistic and everything. It's not very well written. It's based on a British movie by the same name made in 1969, There are more writers in the remake than in the original, so I don't know how much of the original movie is saved in this Hollywood remake. We all know how Hollywood loves to make remakes? Well... sometimes it could be better if you didn't do it, like in this case. The world could've survived without The Italian Job remake.

There's one thing I'm really convinced about. No matter that Mark Wahlberg's name is the first one mentioned, Charlize Theron played the true main character. Even if we saw more of the male characters, it was Stella we learned the most of. Mostly we were following everything, maybe not through her eyes, but somehow through her thoughts and emotions. She lost her father, and even though she wasn't a thief, she wanted revenge. We sort of joined the team with her and not anyone else. I also love how she was portrayed. She was smart as whip, loved to drive fast cars but also got really uncomfortable and disgusted when Steve tried to hit on her. Maybe I've been watching the wrong movies (in a way The Italian Job is one of those wrong movies) but I've never seen a female character showing openly how uncomfortable disgusting slimy men like Steve can make us. Of course she was written sort one one-dimensional, but oh wait, so were all the characters.

Of course The Italian Job had the same problems as every damn action movie has. They are almost boring. There may be explosions and car chases and all that, but those are so annoying to follow and watch. Especially the car chases are so annoying to listen to. The only kind of action movies I like are the ones made by Tarantino, and usually they don't even have that much action. Like in Reservoir Dogs, you could only see what happened before and after the "action". That was very good actually, but look at this other garbage we have. Many people could disagree, but I don't find action movies exciting or anything, they are just boring. There's action and then few funny lines and few "deep" lines and more action. 

I'm not just disliking The Italian Job because of it's an action movie, but because it's so generic action movie with nothing new to offer to the audience. And that's the worst kind of action movie. Sure, it's good if you're bored and don't want to watch anything interesting or even remember much (because who remembers what happens during car chases? I still don't remember that bike, helicopter chase / fight scene in X-Men Origins: Wolverine, even though I've seen that movie too many times). It's okay to watch if you just want to waste time and have a few laughs with friends etcetera, but if you're writing reviews then you find yourself getting bored at action movies.

☆☆☆

3 / 10

"Hold me." "I can't."

A story about Edward, an incomplete man with scissors as his hands, who has lived in solitude in a big house since. Then he is found and he gets a chance to live within more or less ordinary people in an ordinary neighbourhood.

Edward Scissorhands is the second movie I saw directed by Tim Burton. The first one was Charlie And The Chocolate Factory, which was one of my favourite childhood movies. Charlie And The Chocolate Factory was so magical through the eyes of a 10-year-old. And then about two years later I saw Edward Scissorhands for the first time, and it was so amazing. It was also magical, but in a different way. Of course Edward Scissorhands has that magic that appeals to young people, but it's still magical even if you are 18 or even 50. 

One thing that makes the movie amazing how Edward is surprisingly relatable. Of course not literally, none of us has scissors as hands etcetera, and most of us aren't first admired and then suddenly despised. No, but Edward is an outsider, and even if we aren't always outsiders, how often do 12-year-olds and kids older than that feel that? I know I have, probably since I started going to the school. So even though our stories might not be like Edward's, we can strongly relate to outsiders, if we've ever felt that way. And of course there's the fact that Edward's easy to like. He's cute, very simple, but he has a pure heart. He's... well, he's human.

The movie is very easy on the eye. There is very much of that certain darkness Burton's movies tend to have, but also there are many bright colours, pastel colours. Especially all the houses and cars and clothing of the people living in the neighbour. What's mostly dark, it's Edward's clothing and the castle he used to live in - and of course any time it's night etcetera. But the colours and lighting are so wonderfully used. I could really like cinematography in Burton's movies, if there was just something more unique in it. Like it's pretty basic, apart from that atmosphere that the emo kids (and my dad) seem to like. 

I do like the music, it's something that makes me tear up even if I wasn't watching the movie. Of course Danny Elfman is someone who is very overused in movies, I'm almost tired of him - and Hans Zimmer, and who else is there? There are so many that are in every third movie. Where are the more unique movie composers? Doing music for indie movies? Well I hope they are enjoying their work.

Edward Scissorhands may be the only movie that makes me cry every time I watch it. If I'm completely honest, I don't even understand why some people wouldn't cry. Sure, sure, people like different things and blah blah, but Edward Scissorhands, no matter how lovely it is, it's also so cruel and heart-wrenching. 

☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆

8 / 10

"I'm a ghost with the most, babe."

A couple realises they are dead, and their house is taken over by a new family. They want them to leave, but can't scare them on their own, so they have to rely on a "bio-exorcist".

If there's one thing to say about Beetlejuice, it's utterly ridiculous movie. The humour in this movie varies. There's dark humour because of the death and everything. And of course there's weird and gross, perverted humour coming from Betelgeuse. When I was younger I felt almost uncomfortable with that, but nowadays, well, I guess since I'm older and seen a lot of stuff in movies, it doesn't even bother me anymore. 

I love the effects in this movie. Of course the movie was made in the 80s and, well, special effects weren't what they are now, but I loved them. Especially because they used a lot of that stop-motion doll thing, that Burton has used in The Nightmare Before Christmas and Corpse Bride. Of course in Beetlejuice that stop-motion technique was different since it wasn't used all the time, In Nightmare Before Christmas and Corpse Bride that technique is truly marvellous, and it's wonderful to look at, but when it's used just a little, it's cool but also kind of clumsy and gawky. The difference between the actual actors and the effects is so clear it's almost too clear. Of course it's a nice change from the effects of these days. I don't really now what to think about it.

I truly love Winona Ryder's character Lydia. Her character says some really sappy things are 14-year-old (I think) might not really say, not out loud, but I truly love her. And the costume department truly did magnificent job on her clothing, I mean I'd like to have all those outfits. Also Betlegeuse's outfits were cool. 

I can't really say much about Alec Baldwin and Geena Davis. I mean they did an alright job as Adam and Barbara, but I don't know, they were simply deccent. Winona Ryder was truly adorable and fantastic as Lydia, and I think she's becoming one of my favourite actresses. And then there's Michael Keaton. It truly is weird watching Beetlejuice because it's hard to see Keaton under all the make up. I just mostly stare at him and think "Is it truly Michael Keaton? Maybe I've been tricked." But he does wonderful job, he is absolutely ridiculous.

I like the story a lot, but I have a feeling there could be so much more. I did hear about a possible sequel, but apparently it wouldn't be directed by Burton. I don't actually mind, since I'm not that interested in Burton. Apparently Winona Ryder is confirmed (I have no idea where people get this information because I don't find anything), but Michael Keaton isn't. If there will be a sequel, and if Keaton's not in it, then I'm probably not going to see it. Sure, it might be interesting and even good, but I can't really see anybody else as Beetlejuice. If anyone else would do it, it would feel like a cheap copy of the original.

☆☆☆☆☆

5 / 10