"Sex is a joke in heaven?" "The way I understand it, it's mostly a joke down here, too."

Year: 1999

Directer & written by: Kevin Smith

An abortion clinic worker with special heritage, two prophets and the 13th apostle have to stop two banished angels from getting back to heaven and thus destroying the whole world.

The story of Dogma starts as interesting, but it gets weirder and weirder towards the end, and gets more absurd. At the beginning I thought I'd like the movie more, but it just got more disappointing. I enjoyed the wisdom that was there every once in a while, and I loved the unique take on religion. But every once in a while it just felt like the whole movie was emphasizing religion too much. It makes no sense, since it's supposed to be a fantasy comedy about religion. 

But Dogma pointed out good and bad things about religion - and the bible! Scenes explaining the gender and race issues were so good. It was also great how it was pointed out how people do weird and violent things in the name of god. This is exactly what the two banished angels were doing: Loki and Bartleby killed people who had committed terrible sins. The deeds of these people seemed indeed horrific, but what gives two banished angels the right to take "law" into their own hands? They seemed mostly like some of those crazy Christian serial killers, who kill people committing sins, like the guy in Se7en.

But I noticed some slight homophobic, misogynistic and cisnormative themes there, that felt kind of tasteless. I don't know if it is the writer or the whole subject of the movie, religion, which is usually viewed as all of these things, whether there is a reason for it or not.

Sure, I get that the movie was from the 90's, but some of the effects were still so bad it was ridiculous. 

But honestly I really don't know what to say about this movie. It was a big disappointment, that's for sure. It was funny at times, but one of my acquaintances spoke so highly of this movie, I expected it to be better. Maybe he just has weirder taste in movies, or if not weirder, different. Dogma has that cult reputation, and it's definitely worth seeing. However a cult reputation doesn't guarantee it's any good.

☆☆☆☆☆

5 / 10

"Our words, our language cannot explain all that there is. There are other ways someone can die to us."

Year: 2013

Directed by: Richard LaGravenese¨

Written by: Richard La Gravenese; Kami Garcia & Margaret Stohl (novel)

Ethan Wate has been dreaming of the same girl for a long time. He lives in a town called Gatlin, and longs to get out of there. Then the school has a new student: Lena Duchannes, who is the niece of the mysterious Macon Ravenwood the whole city is scared of. Together Ethan and Lena discover dark secrets, curses and history of their families. their shared past and fate. 

I've seen Beautiful Creatures once before, and I wanted to see it again. The magic of the movie didn't seem any less astonishing as it was less than a year ago. The magic comes from the visual side of the movie, and especially the visual effects. Sometimes fantasy films seem like the makers were afraid to make the film actually look magical, especially if it takes place in our "normal world". Beautiful Creatures takes place in a normal-seeming town and all that, but still they used visual effects as much as was needed. And it works very well - when effects are used well, it really feels magical. It doesn't always have to look so realistic because hey, we are talking about magic! What about magic is realistic? Anything that looks amazing is good enough for magic.

If there's anything more enchanting than the visual side of the movie, it's the music. The soundtrack by thenewno2 is amazing, and I love every track of it. It's on Spotify, so listen to it if you can. It's excellent.

I'm still no quite sure if I like Ethan. Sure, as a character he's interesting, but I don't know if I'd like him as a person. He thinks everyone in the whole town are assholes, but then he is so pretentious trying not to be like them that he is like them, in his own way. But that's easy to expect - a lot of characters from YA-novels are like that. They try to be the opposite of everyone ("I'm not like those people") so they become so pretentious. Think about John Green's characters. They are so pretentious and obnoxious. Then again they have nothing to make up for it. Ethan on the other hand had something else in him, he wasn't just a huge asshole, he just didn't let anyone else see the other sides of him. 

Now that I've talked about Ethan, I want to talk about Ethan and Lena. I don't think I can say anything about their chemistry. I can't say if they had that, but I can say one thing. They may love each other, but there's more than that. One thing is sure about their relationship. They both represent what they want but can't have (?). Ethan wants excitement, he wants out of Gatlin. He's bored of the typical life and wants something new and interesting. That's Lena. And Lena wants to live normally, and Ethan can provide that to her. Clearly Lena is more what Ethan wants than the other way around.

Lena's character is also amazing. She has more than one side of her. She acts coldly in class, but shows her softer side to Ethan, and of course she shows how she can be thin-skinned, no matter what she acts like around people.

I adore this movie. Maybe the writing isn't the best there is, but it's still good, and I don't even want to start analysing what's bad about it. I love it, and for once, I want that to be enough.

Beautiful Creatures is an enchanting film with interesting storylines, characters and romance. It's better than the typical YA fantasy romances out there. If you haven't seen this one yet, you should.

☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆

8 / 10

"It's my responsibility to bring the Book of Peace safely to Syracuse." "See, now I just feel bad, 'cause you're gonna get fired."

Year: 2003

Directed by: Patrick Gilmore & Tim Johnson

Writers: John Logan

"A Persian sailor named Sinbad is on a quest to find the magical legendary Book of Peace, a mysterious artifact that Eris, the Greek wicked goddess of chaos, has ultimately framed him for stealing! If he fails on this quest, his childhood friend Prince Proteus of Syracuse will take Sindbad's death penalty, while Eris gains a desired foothold of power in the world of mortals."

- Summary written by Anthony Pereyra

Mostly I watched Sinbad - Legend of the Seven Seas tonight because I watched the Road to El Dorado yesterday. These two very much go to the same category, even if the latter was my favourite and the former... not so much.

This film looks as good as The Road to El Dorado. Especially the mix of traditional animation and the kind of 3D computer animation is very interesting. Most of the creatures look three dimensional and it makes the threat they pose seem way more threatening when you compare the realistic looking creatures with the human characters, who look much simpler and just less real. Especially the 3D animation works well in the realm of Eris, the goddess of chaos, because with that technique it looks way more chaotic. 

The music in this movie is not as good as in the Road to El Dorado. Don't get me wrong, the music is alright, but that's it. It's just decent. The only track that's really amazing is Let The Games Begin which very much plays whenever Eris is around. That track is mysterious and playful, and it gives the original sound to those few scene that same melody is playing, even if the song itself would be different. Harry Gregson-Williams is of course a good composer, but let's be honest, his music doesn't really stand out in films. 

What is really missing from Sinbad is the chemistry. There isn't that kind of chemistry between any characters than is between Miguel and Tulio from the Road to El Dorado. I'd hate to compare these two movies too much, but the Road to El Dorado just sets the demand for animated adventures very high - especially when we are talking about characters. However, there's something similar between Sinbad and Miguel and Tulio. They all were swindlers, dishonest people, and very unlikely heroes. The difference, however, is that Sinbad actually was a hero. 

Can you guess what I loved most about this movie when I was a kid - and what I still love the most? Eris. The character looks amazing. She looks beautiful yet chaotic and evil, and her hair, my god, her hair. Even if the animation is so beautiful in this movie, Eris' hair is the best part.

The story of Sinbad is interesting, except partially it doesn't make sense. Why do they need a book to keep peace? Why is Eris in this, because this movie doesn't take place in Greece, does it? Those are the two most important questions I learnt to ask now, even if I didn't wonder that as a kid. 

Sinbad is breath-takingly beautiful movie, but the story doesn't live up to the visual side of the movie. Something is lacking, but it sure is nice to look at.

☆☆☆☆

4 / 10

"If I believed in fate, I wouldn't be playing with loaded dice."

Year: 2000

Directed by: Eric 'Bibo' Bergeron & Don Paul

Written by: Terry Rossio & Ted Elliott

Two Swindlers, Miguel and Tulio, end up on an unknown coast after several misadventures with only a horse and a map to El Dorado. They decide to find the city of gold and steal the gold, but neither of them could've expected that the natives mistake them for their gods. 

When I was a kid, The Road to El Dorado was one of my favourite movies. Sure, that can be said of many movies, but the point is, I wasn't the only one. Especially now I often find out how so many people loved it as well. I think I've heard almost anyone saying at least once that they loved it, and most say it was their favourite film growing up.

It's not surprising. The Road to El Dorado charms you right in the beginning. Even if you usually hate songs in animated films, the music of this one is amazing. Every song is beautiful and amazing, and makes me feel nostalgic these days. And they don't ruin the dialogue by turning a conversation to a song (Apart from It's Tough to be a god, but that song was so good it didn't even matter). Instead they are planted in scenes where no words are spoken. It works very well, and is a lot better than characters of the movie singing. Even if the music in the Lion King is phenomenal, Can You Feel The Love Tonight is kind of ruined by making the stanza Simba and Nala's thoughts, it kind of ruins the moment. In this film, it works way better. Both soundtracks are by Elton John, but The Road to El Dorado works better.

And the animation is so beautiful. It's really captivating. The human characters look so much better than what Disney's usually do, especially because they are way more diverse instead of just putting the same face on every Disney prince. And the world around the character is the most beautiful I've seen in an animated movie. It's very colourful, it's lovely.

But what really keeps the movie going and makes the story really stand out, is the main duo. Miguel and Tulio are great characters. They are different from each other, but they want the same things - which is why I wouldn't want to see a sequel for this movie. I'd rather see a prequel. How did they meet? How did they end up doing what they were doing in the beginning of the movie? It's interesting. And thankfully Miguel and Tulio aren't exactly the kind of heroes you'd except. In fact they aren't really heroic, apart from one or two deeds. Above all, they start as criminals. And their chemistry is so good. And these days there are a lot of rumours going around that they were meant to be homosexuals, but I don't really know if that is true. I haven't seen any reliable information, only speculation and claims that had no proper sources. If anyone has a proper source, please, let me know, because I think it would be interesting to read.

The Road to El Dorado has always been amazing movie, and that hasn't changed in all these years. If you haven't seen it, do yourself a favour and watch it. It's great, and it's hilarious. I could go on an mention every good thing about this movie, but I think that would be pointless. This movie is one of the best animated films that has been ever made.

☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆

10 / 10

"Why are you walking?" "I like to walk for a change. Makes me feel normal."

Year: 2008

Directed by: Doug Liman

Written by: David S. Goyer, Jim Uhls & Simon Kinberg, Steven Gould (Novel)

As a teenager, David Rice realised he had the ability to teleport. He ran away from home, started practising his skills and started living a luxurious life where he could visit any place in short notice, and do anything he wanted to. Too good to be true? Absolutely, since there is an ancient organization, that has been hunting people like David - Jumpers - for centuries.

I've seen Jumper once before. It was around the time I started blogging about films, which means, that blog post was extremely short and probably didn't tell anyone anything about the movie. I don't even know if I should check out what I once wrote. ... I did check it out. It was four extremely short paragraphs, and it's not worth reading. I won't link it here

I always appreciate superhero movies that aren't made by DC and Marvel. While DC and Marvel just tend to take turns on stealing ideas from each other, other superhero movies tend to bring some creativity and originality to the table, for example, Kick-Ass. Of course we could argue if Jumper is really a "superhero movie", since there are no heroic deeds, but there still are superpowers. But Jumper doesn't bring much originality the table. Sure, the viewpoint is different, since it's not tragic story about a boy who loses everything and starts to protect the city / neighbourhood / few blocks, etcetera. But plotwise, and as a movie, Jumper is just like any other film. The structure of the story, the events, the characters, dialogue and relationships... it all has been experienced before, and it will be experienced again, and there are better writers to do this. Jumper just seems to be another mindless action hodgepodge.

In any case, the main character David Rice, however typical he is, is interesting, and I'd like to examine him more. His childhood wasn't the best one, but still he learned that he could have anything he wanted, and he didn't have to do much to get it. The audience can see how badly this affects David. He's not used to things being off-limits to him, so when he's not allowed to do something, he does it, even if he's supposed to keep his powers hidden. Also, when Griffin refuses to listen to him, he has to act out, even if he knows Griffin is more experienced in that field. Maybe David Rice did never actually grow up, even if he had to live on his own and all that. Everything was way too easy for him. This kind of makes you understand the Paladins that were after him. But is this something that was original for the movie? I haven't read the novel, so I don't really know how much the movie and the book have in common. Apparently the film is only loosely based on the book. So, maybe the book showed David more as what he was - a brat - than as a hero, like the movie so badly tried to. Or if the movie tried to make David a brat, they didn't show that clearly enough.

Even if the movie is good, it should be longer. The explanation for so many important plot points was half-assed. We know nothing except what David knows - and he doesn't know much. Griffin sure explained him shortly what he needed to know. That's realistic though, would people in that kind of situation have the time to sit down and go through everything? Even if it was realistic, it still isn't very friendly to the viewers.

Jumper is a decent action movie, but it gets tiring after the first view. It is boring, unoriginal and too fast. There had to be better movies out there, and thankfully there are. What should you watch instead of Jumper? Kingsman and Wanted are a good start.

☆☆☆☆

4 / 10

"I only work in black and sometimes very, very dark grey."

Year: 2014

Directors: Phil Lord & Christopher Miller

Writers: Phil Lord, Christopher Miller, Dan Hageman & Kevhin Hageman.

"The evil plans of Lord Business to ensure order in his world with a powerful weapon is in jeopardy as a prophecy about 'Special' comes true with the discovery of 'Piece of Resistance'. With odds like Bad Cop, Micro managers and 'Man from upstairs' stacked against him during his journey to save the world; Emmett, a construction worker, has a long way to go before he succeeds."

- Summary written by PipingHotViews

My sister and I were about to watch the Big Hero 6, only to find out it wasn't on Netflix. Anyway, we decided to watch the Lego Movie, and if I'm completely honest, I probably will prefer Lego Movie over Big Hero 6 any day.

The world in this movie is amazing. It feels limitless and imaginative - which exactly has always been the strength of the toys too. You can build anything and your imagination is the only limit (apart from you know, not having enough pieces.) I love how they didn't just make a dumb funny movie, but actually captivated the power Legos have always had. I mean, they are without the doubt the best toy there is. Okay, enough about how great Legos were. But yeah, the best part about the movie is how amazing the world is. Yeah, there are many pop culture characters there, like Batman, but it isn't just a crossover of many things, the pop culture characters just are like a nice spice there. Sure, they aren't completely loyal to the originals, but who cares, they were fun.

Another amazing thing about the world is how it plays with many levels of reality. Of course there are the many different worlds in the Lego worlds, but that isn't all, as you can guess by the 'Man from upstairs'. 

The plot is good. It is of course simple, but what do you expect from a movie that suits for the whole family. Simple story doesn't mean the story wouldn't have many meaningful lessons. Not that I'm going to list them all. There are probably better lists out there that also explain things and introduce different views. Anyway, the plot was intriguing. One of the elements are the different levels of reality. That brings so much depth to the story. And it is also very exciting. I was eager to see the end, because like many great movies, it actually made you think "how are they going to survive this".

But the Lego Movie is hilarious. The humour is so absurd at times, but it isn't just absurd humour. There are many different kind of humour. Sometimes putting many kind of jokes together doesn't work and it's just kind of "Decide already!" but it works in Lego Movie, since it's intended to be funny to people of all ages. I cracked up many times, the first one was at "Lord Business". 

And the animation! Oh, it looks so smooth and nice, but also it is hilarious when needed to be. Even if it wasn't stop-motion, it has the same strengths with that technique, since it's made to look the same way. 

The voice acting in this movie is great, though it would be nicer if they used actual voice actors instead of typical Hollywood actors. Sure, Chris Pratt is great, but what about... Billy West? That would've been great. Of course my favourite was Will Arnett as Batman. It might have something to do with me watching both seasons of BoJack Horseman in four days. 

Summa summarum, the Lego Movie was hilarious and original, even if the story was pretty much used. I do not regret for one bit that I saw this movie, even if I was suspicious at first.

☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆

8 / 10

"Do I need someone when I'm doubting myself and I'm insecure, and my heart's failing me? Do I need someone who, when the heat gets hot, has my back?"

Year: 2012

Director: Colin Trevorrow 

Writers: Derek Connolly

"Darius is a young intern at a Seattle-based magazine and jumps at the chance to investigate the author of a classified ad seeking someone to travel back in time with. Along with Jeff, the staff writer, and Arnau, a fellow intern, the three go on a road trip to a coastal town. While Jeff just wants to chase after his high school crush and Arnau wants some kind of life experience, Darius spends her time with Kenneth, a man who believes that he has built a time machine. The closer they become and the more they understand about each other, the less clear it becomes if Kenneth is just crazy or if he actually is going to successfully travel back in time."

- Summary written by napierslogs

I hadn't actually even heard of this film before, so when I found out it was made in 2012, that was quite a surprise. I thought it was newer. Anyway, once again I found myself bored and wondering what to watch. This one had been on the front page all week, so I decided to watch it, because the plot summary on Netflix seemed amazing. But the actual plot turned out to be much interesting.

First of all, why is the story so interesting? It has that same kind of thing that Birdman has: is he or isn't he? In both cases, "is he delusional or not?" In Birdman it is "Does he really have superpowers?" while in Safety Not Guaranteed it is "Does he really know how to travel in time?" It's so amazing when the writers can play with the viewers mind, make them think it is real, then make them think it isn't, is, isn't... That's really effective. That makes you want to see the whole film, even if just to find out how it really is. One other thing that makes the plot interesting is time travel. It's one of the greatest things in fiction, because there are so many rules and all. 

The characters are also interesting. Most of them have depth, very interesting depths and different depths, which is very important. If every character just has the similar kind of depth, like tragic childhood, it's not really depth of character, it feels more like just a spice. From most of the character you can figure something out, but what really made me think was Jeff. He seems like the least deep character, and his character still has the most fascinating twist. He seems like a shallow character, but has a moment of sensitivity, vulnerability, but is let down, and it really gets to him. It gives the character something else, while most of the character stay pretty much the same, something just is revealed from them.

The cinematography is amazing. It kind of reminds me of Wes Anderson's films. To be honest, I didn't pay attention towards the end, because the plot started  to interest me more than the techniques, but at the start the cinematography is almost playful.

The music is also well chosen. It is mostly light, except when it needs to be something else. It works very well with the scenes. 

One of my favourite thing is how there were scenes that make you feel so good, and it doesn't feel forced. The film-makers have really done such authentic, nice scenes, and you just want the movie to stay that way, but of course it doesn't, unless it is  the end, Stories need conflict, but it's so refreshing to have scenes, that are bonafide, and not just typical Hollywood wank. 

In short, should you watch this movie? Yes, you should. It's light and deep, it has interesting story and amazing cinematography and music. It might not be perfect, but it doesn't need to be. It's charming, warm and... weirdly real, in all of its surrealism.

 ☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆

9 / 10