What you want to see vs what you need to see.

Can we all just agree with one thing?
We all felt a surge of some sort chemical in our brains when we saw for the first time Godzilla?

So much build up for that. Granted, the scene lasted less than 5 minutes... but when I saw Godzilla roar for the first time, I felt my entire body shake with excitement.

There are some things that CGI has been able to do. Create magnificent things that our minds crave sometimes.

Remember "Pacific Rim"? One of the most strange films, yet satisfying films I've ever seen. It was something else to see monster after monster getting slayed by a giant robot with a sword. It creates (at least as a man) a rush of testosterone in our brains, that we just gotta get out there and do something.
Sometimes, directors know exactly how to deliver the strongest message. Or the greatest moment in a film.
Like in Jurassic Park. We wanted to see the T-rex, but we didn't get to see the T-rex until almost an hour into the film. But once he was on screen... BAM, it was something else. You felt like he was actually there and something so big and so magnificent was on the big screen.

Some directors DON'T know how to set it up. Transformers 4 The First one again, only without Shia The poster for this film had optimus prime on a freaking dinosaur spitting fire... I should have been like the dude in .gif above... but rather I was more like

I didn't care... no matter the awesomeness.
The question though should not be whether the thing being shown is awesome or not. It is whether what the directors needs you to see.
Some directors focus their entire story on building up towards the big reveal. And once the big reveal is out...then the entire film focuses on that. Going back to Jurassic Park, we wanted to see the T-rex, and we got to, and then it was running away from the T-rex.
They incorporated what we wanted to see with what we needed to see to make the story flow.
With Transformers, we didn't need to see how Optimus was riding that thing... it was secondary.
Therefore, the build up was not as big.


That's all I got...sorry, no big disagreement today...
Maybe next time...
Maybe next time I'll talk about the movies that EVERYONE wants me to talk about... the Hobbit films....

This will be tough

It's been a year... time to look at it

Almost a year ago... the studio that is considered "The best Animation studio in the World" gave us another great film.
Frozen hit the theaters November 27 2013. It was... a HUGE hit.

It made $243,390 on opening weekend and everyone... and I mean EVERYONE was singing the songs and talking about it
Many people considered this "The return of Disney" or Disney's way of telling the world... "I'm bringing animation back".
And with good reason. Dreamworks had just released Despicable Me 2 (And it wasn't a bad film) but a lot of people (including myself) started to get tired of animated movies. We were watching the same thing over and over and over... Cool people doing cool things acting in a cool way.
What do I mean?
Well, that year, we saw the following releases
1)Planes by Pixar...
2) The Croods by Dreamworks Animation
3) Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs 2
4) Monsters University
5) Despicable Me 2
All of these films had the same idea. Not the same message. I never saw Planes (and I don't plan to), but out of the other 4 films, I see a pattern of pleasing towards the audience by becoming products of their time.
Sure, The Croods was set upon cave-men/women but it still very simple formula. Same with all the other films. They all talk "hip" and try to convey a bridge between the audience and the characters. Most of the time, they fail. Pretty bad. They end up by looking like that one kid who tries too hard to look cool by talking like the others, while everyone knows they are out of their comfort zone

I may be talking just out of personal experience, but I was kind of getting sick these people trying to talk a language that is not theirs. There was no genuineness and no real threat or story. Safe bet after safe bet after safe bet. 

I felt like there was nothing new anymore. Add to the fact that most of the live action movies were taken from books... So, originality was kind of gone.

Then Frozen came out. 

I remember seeing the trailer for this film and I was already like

I was skeptical. I didn't want to watch it, because I thought it was going to be Tangled 2... return of the awful franchise. 

But it wasn't. After seeing it for the first time... everyone was under one voice singing out loud "Let it Go!!!"

I... I... I didn't like this movie.

It was strange... I didn't like a movie I was supposed to like. I saw it time and time again, looking for things to hate, but nothing came. Yet I still wasn't getting the entire hype.  (I did memorize the songs... by accident).

But, enough about the past.

Now to future. 

I recently saw it again, and I don't think it holds up.

GET YOUR FIRE TORCHES AND PITCHFORKS HERE FOR THE PUBLIC ATTACK ON MAU'S OPINION!!!

I mean... it's not horrible. Out of 5, I give it a solid 3.5. I think the movie is a great turn of events. I think that it is actually Disney's way of telling the world "Let ME teach you kids how it's done". But throughout the Frozen craze, people were saying "ooo It's as good as Lion King" or "It's even better than Beauty and the Beast", or (the one that made me take another look at it) "Probably Disney's best work yet".

Well, let me tell you. 

It's not. 

It's a good film, but not a great one. I don't think it belongs in "Disney's top 5 movies". I'm sorry... I just don't see it

Why?

Well, let's look at the story.

Frozen (SPOILER ALERT BTW) is about a princess with the power to turn things to ice. She (out of an incredible pressure of hiding her powers) curses her hometown in infinite weather and her sister, Anna, teams up with a mountain man, his playful reindeer and a snowman to change the weather condition.  (As basic as you are going to get... I know there is more to it... but meh)

The story is based upon the story of the Snow Queen, but because I am not looking at source material, it doesn't really matter.

So, first, let's talk about the good things. 

1) The animation and the setting. HOLY CRAP... Stunning, beautiful setting. Every snowflake was probably designed individually so that the amount of detail going into it would be perfect. It feels big and powerful. There is a real sense of being in another world. The entire idea that it is set in a place we don't know during a time that is "sorta viking-ish" I think plays out great. 

2) The music.... I don't wanna go into too much detail on this one... but it is great

3) The villain is almost perfect... 

Hans is freaking awesome as a villain. Had me guessing the entire time and I did not expect him to become the evil one... The only thing I have a problem with is his motivation. He wants to rule the land.

Come ON!!!! We've seen this already... plain ambition... He is a freaking prince, what more do you want???

You could make the argument that because he is the youngest of a big family, there will be no kingdom for him to rule. I would be lying if I said I didn't understand that. But, he doesn't act like the youngest of a family. He seems like he was in control. 

Let me see him strive for attention, let me see him being actually treated like the youngest. Instead, he is this evil mastermind that just wants to rule the kingdom. A little bit overdone if you ask me. 

(BTW For me, the perfect villain is Gaston).

What are the problems?

1) The characters. There are a lot of characters in this film. And all of them are "safe" archetypes of classic tales. 

We have the hero (or heroine) who wants more out of life than her boring life in the castle... Thats!!--- really boring... we've seen that with...well... most of the other princesses in Disney. 

You have the OTHER Heroine/Villain. A tortured soul, Elsa tries to live a life of peace and quiet where she can enjoy her lifestyle without the pressure of everyone else set on her. 

As original as this is, well, it's not the greatest idea for kids. What are you saying? That if I feel pressured into being a responsible young man... I should run away because I really feel comfortable being a lazy person? In the end, Elsa learns that "Love" is the best way to live her life with her powers and be accepted by everyone. That is really just, boring. 

I did like the idea that it wasn't a kiss that thawed out the Anna's frozeness, but rather an act of pure love out of the sister... that was genius, I actually like that. Fraternal love. I can get behind that. 

You have the dude with his reindeer. O, I hate this guy, Kristoff. 

He is to men, what (many people say) Ariel is to women. Simplifying them to a level of almost insulting. He is played as a dumb guy obsessed with his reindeer and his sleigh, he is cold and doesn't care about feelings. He is basically the stereotype of a stereotype. I really don't like him, because he is just a DUDE... 

And of course.... Olaf.

Oh, Olaf... I know you mean well. I know that you are meant to be innocent and cute and pretty. I can't stand you. 

I really cannot stand you. Everything you say is covered with rainbows and butterflies and cutesy wittle bwaby twalk. It gets sick after a while. I wanted to see something funny, but at the same time, take a serious tone to it. That scene where he is melting for Anna, was MEANT to be serious... but THOSE EYES... I cannot take him seriously. He is too cute for everyone to go "AWWWWW" that it drives me sick.

The last problem I have with this movie is the after effect. 

What is it questioning? 

What kind of impact is it leaving on me as a viewer?

Well, just songs. Songs that are great, don't get me wrong. But the songs are the only thing that it is left for this thing. People sing the songs to this day. And that is the only thing that it has going for it. It is so good that it becomes it's downfall. Because of the goodness of the songs, the rest of the movie becomes forgettable. Now, in other cases, the fact that the movie is forgettable means that the movie didn't try hard enough.... not with Frozen. They tried their best, but their trump card was the songs, and with comparison, the rest of the movie didn't stand a chance. 

But, all of this is just on a PERSONAL opinion. I'm not saying that I am right, or that you are wrong if you love it. I am just saying what I think of the film. I saw some flaws... that in other movies, I don't see.

I personally think that even though it is a good film, I wouldn't say that it is Disney's best. Overall, I still think Disney still has to show us what they can really do with 3D animation.

CGI and Ben Hur

Did you hear?
They are making a Ben Hur remake.

Why... yes... They are making a Ben Hur Remake...

I've seen the Ben Hur film, total of 4 or 5 times. I wouldn't say that it is my favorite film... but it is a good one to enjoy....
IF YOU WANT TO SPEND 3 HOURS SITTING ON A COUCH DOING NOTHING BUT WATCHING TV....


Anyway. As I was reading the info of this new remake (link here) I couldn't help but see that the director of the movie "Abraham Lincoln Vampire Slayer" is the one that will take such a project.
Now, I didn't HATE ALVS... I was amused at it several times... but the one thing that was very present in it was the CGI. (Computer Generated Image). So much CGI was in this film, that one could call it a CGLAM (Computer Generated Live Action Movie)...

Anyway...
My big question for this would be....
Should this new Ben Hur movie have CGI?

Let's look at some history of this.
Well, Ben Hur was one of the few films that can be considered an "Epic Film". The story is nothing special... but what made it epic was the size of production that went to it. Millions of dollars went into building sets, training animals, making props and hiring people to do even the most useless things. Just look at this shot from the movie

Doesn't that just look grand? Magnificent? Splendorous? and (Let me check the thesaurus real quick here) Monumental?
There is a greater scheme in all of this that sets the audience in a place bigger than themselves.
All of this is possible to be made again, many people would argue then, that the movie should not include CGI. It should be another grand movie of epic proportions.
But then again... there is CGI... UNLIMITED POSSIBILITIES...
CGI brought to reality so many things in the last few years... It gave us the idea that a man could actually crawl up walls.

Or this 

That also looks so grand and magnificent... 

Well, I think it depends on the use of the CGI... If the CGI helps the illusion of reality being made... then I would say "GO FOR IT"... but, if the CGI is used as a cheap way to film the entire thing, and the illusion of reality is broken by making EVERYTHING CGI (Looking at you Lucas), then I would say no to it.

I guess it depends on what CGI can do.... 

We know that it will continue to bring new ideas and new concepts to the big screen, but overall, I think that it shouldn't be used for everything that is done now-a-days. Some movies still require the touch of real life. Other movies deserve CGI because reality is limited. Aliens in the sky? I would say CGI instead of really bad puppets... (Looking at you Power Rangers Turbo)... 

What do you all think?

Where does CGI stand in the world of today's cinema?

The expendables vs Transformers

Well, it has finally come to this.
I am back to school, and I have been busy. I now have to write a thesis on something to do with English Lit and I have just been reading a lot.
But, that hasn't stopped me from watching awesome films and thinking about the bad ones.
I recently finished rewatching the Expendables 2 (I missed the third one and I am very sad at that). But as the credits were rolling, I was with a smile on my face. I liked this movie... alot!

Let me give you a bit of backstory of why I was surprised that I liked this movie.

The year was 2010. I was just starting to like movies in a different way. It was no longer about the cool explosions and the way a certain man killed another dude. It was about the quality of the film. It was a year of discovery for me. And with great help from the theatrical releases of that year. I mean, the film standard was raised. We had How to Train your Dragon, Inception, Toy Story 3, The first part of the Seventh HP movie. All of these and more were coming out and were making a big impact on me.
Then I watched the Expendables.
I hated the film. It was cheap, cheesy and was filled with cliches to the brim. I came out of the film, feeling rather disgusted at the fact that Silverster Stallone was Rocky at some point, and now he is this botox filled man.
I was turned off by the film.
Cut to 2 years later, where the Expendables 2 came out. I saw the trailer for it, and I said "Nope". I shut down the TV that was playing the trailer, and I left wherever I was. I ignored it. Until Christmas of that year, when my mom bought it on DVD.
We put it in the Blu Ray player and let the movie begin. It was the same. Cliches, cheesy dialogue and big explosions. But I liked it! Why?! It was a cliche after cliche. Cheesy line after cheesy line. The action was amazing, but it was the only thing. The actors were famous old superstars that did things where I was confused. But I still liked it!
This is where I came to a discovery.  Sometimes, movies need to be for the sake of turning off your brain and watching a bunch of explosions.
There are movies out there, that are meant to create zero impact on you. They are just there to entertain. There is no message to them, no rhyme, no reason. Just pure testosterone filled entertainment. This allowed me to forgive many movies that were coming out. I started to see films differently. Which ones have a message? Which ones are meant to just watch and not think for 2 hours as things are happening around you?
It was an awesome discovery.
But then, I saw this

O this. This movie is plain old despicable. I saw this with my older brother and our reactions were practically the same.

I had wasted three hours of  my life watching this piece of crap. I was very disappointed at the fact that this

Did not entertain me. Why? Why is this movie so terrible? How come it can be filled with the same things that The expendables had, but leave me hollow and empty.  I mean, THAT IS FREAKING OPTIMUS PRIME, RIDING A METAL DINOSAUR (wh I know has a name...but the movie didn't say it, so I won't)
What is the difference between these two films?

Both of them are senseless, both of them are filled with cliches, both of them have big names, and both of them have a sense of action that no other films can create.
Yet, what is the difference?

Well, I think that it is the fact that the Expendables movies, know that they are not serious movies. The entire film has an aim towards goofiness and a sillyness. Not having to deal with heavy material and knowing that the characters are already set in their places. They are not going anywhere, so you don't feel the responsibility of watching them grow. You feel connected with them, yes, but you know that the characters will not really change. Hence, you shouldn't change with them. This is not always a good thing. There a characters that need change, but they don't. You feel them getting stuck on the same trait that aids to their fall, but in this movie, the case is special.
Throughout the first scene, the first thing you see is just action. Explosions and gunfire. No explanation. Usually, people would would be reacting like

But not in this movie. The action is enough to draw us in and get us invested in characters we don't even know. The movie knows that there doesn't have to be a reason. It is not a movie that needs to be taken seriously. And does it work? YES!
The movie is not meant to be analyzed and be taken seriously. People will not be coming out of the movie saying "I really think that Stallone was making me doubt whether or not the ethical choices of our society". They will be saying "Holy Crap, do you remember that part where Chuck Norris appeared!!!"

On the other hand, you have Michael Bay.
A movie that takes itself too seriously, but fails to be serious. They try to put in comedy, but the ambiance doesn't allow it. They try to set in a sombre tone, but the failed comedy and jokes keep it grounded on goofyness. So it cannot be seen as more than just plain silly.

I love the part in the beginning of the film where the daughter of Mark Whalberg says to her girlfriends "We are going to get WASTED!!!" but then a few minutes later, she is telling Mark "I sometimes wonder who the real adult is in this house".
It is just contradictory, and it doesn't make sense.
Michael Bay was trying to convey a plot that would create a franchise, but it failed. It cannot be taken seriously because the characters are not real. They try to be, but they fail, that is why you end with characters so annoying, that one ends up applauding when they die (it actually happened in my case).
It is like being at a family reunion, and one kid comes up and starts playing the recorder bad... like this

And everyone laughs, because it is not meant to be taken seriously. But then another kid comes up and starts playing the recorder with it's pants down, but playing perfectly the tune of The Lord of the Rings.
You end up by being confused. You don't laugh, and you don't recognize his talent. He is trying to be funny, on purpose, but trying to be serious at the same time. And fails!

My brother says this about the Transformers franchise
Whereas transformers wishes to be taken seriously. ..they want to make a franchise based on a plot that nobody understands

Well put.
It's too complicated that it falls flat.

In my opinion, Michael Bay should stay away from movies for a while and not try to bring anything that is nostalgic back.
Or else we end up with things like this!

The Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy was a mistake

HA!
Got you. With this very scandalous title, you have fallen into my trap.
You are now intrigued on why would I say such a ludicrous statement.
But then again... you are now reading this and are expecting a good professional reasoning on why I actually think that the Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy was a mistake. Well, it wasn't a mistake, but at the same time, it was.


Let's try to calm down the batman's fans. Believe me. I am a huge fan of the great creation by Bob Kane. I wish I could know him better. I just know him by a few iconic comics I've read, and all the movies, animations, tv series, online series, online comics, forums, wiki pages, discussion boards, author emails, professional critics, and not so professional critics I've seen around. As a fan, I gotta say that Christopher Nolan does a great job of creating a very unique universe towards the Dark Knight. And he was the first director (in my opinion) that made the comic book movie genre to be taken seriously, after a bunch of flops... (YES... Ang lee... still looking at you). I wish I could bring a "but" to this statement. Many people say that the Dark Knight trilogy is flawless, beside some small plot holes. Every time I see them, I feel the same way. They are pretty awesome movies. A true statement on, not just a story of Batman, but on society, madness, fear, politics, corruption, heroism and real struggles of real people. In fact, there is one scene where there are different Batmans  out there fighting crime together. What is the difference between them and Batman?

There is nothing fantastic about the trilogy. At the end of the day, you feel like there could be a man dressed as a bat out there , fighting crime and trying to bring society to a better place! There could be a man out there with scars on his face bringing chaos to the city and being a total psychopath. Sure, there are a few things that keep the reality at bay. Some technological advancements that one sees in the movies that may be a bit too far-fetched to believe. But my point still stands.

Now... something to be mentioned is that the series needed a reality check. After the abomination that was Batman and Robin...
The series got too goofy and too silly. It needed a darker light, it needed to be taken seriously again. Nolan saved the franchise.
He gave the franchise a good name, a real name.

So, why do I think it was a mistake?

Because of the reality of it all.

Yes. The very thing that made these films incredibly great, is also the very thing that makes it a mistake. Now, don't get me wrong. I am not saying that the movies are bad. Or that the movies are the worst thing that humanity has brought to the screen (Looking at you now Michael Bay and Tommy Wiseau).
No.
But, to fully understand my point, we need to look at some comic book history.
When Batman was first released back in May 1939, there was a sense of fantasy, that comic books gave head to. Comic books were (and are) the new fantasy genre of literature... (as an English Major, I have the right to say this). And that is what the Batman series was for the longest time. It was never too real. There was something that wouldn't make sense, and yet it would make perfect sense.
Batman is the perfect blend between fantasy and reality, when it comes to comic book characters. But, the fantasy always comes out more. It is never too real of a series. For example, let's talk about Ra's Al Ghul. In the comic book, Ra's comes back to life several times using the famous Lazarus' pit. Something that in reality is not possible. In the comic book, it's completely normal. Something like that would never be shown at at Christopher Nolan's film. It would be too fantastic. It has to stick with a certain reality.

So, I've talked about why the movie is great but flawed at the same time... why?
I wouldn't be saying any of it if it wasn't for this

This new Batman coming out is being hated by a lot of people. Why? Because it's not Chris Nolan's Batman. It seems like it is going to be a out of reality batman. We've seen the way the Man of Steel movie was. There was a man that could FLY!! Does that sound real to you? Would that be on a Nolan film? Of course not. It's not real...
This new Batman is not going to be real. He will do things that will be out of the normal scenario. Might actually look far-fetched even.
But that is what a comic book movie is. Something that is not real, being portrayed in a real world. Think about the Avengers, or any other GOOD comic book movie. There is no reality with it. You can't say "Yeah... I see myself being alongside a Thor"... Of course not.

Where am I headed with all of this? Well, even though people are hating on the Bat-fleck, it is safe to say that I will have high hopes for this film. I just think that people should not place their idea of Batman on the Christopher Nolan's films.

I can only hope that this Batman is a true comic book batman. Nolan's Batman was good... but not the right one that we needed... probably the one we deserved... or was it the other way around?

Marvel at the Marvelous Marvel

I don't think I will ever forget the day that my older brother called me upstairs to his room to watch something important (He was the only one of us who had a computer and good internet). I just remember going, and then I saw this

 I think this was the first time I could say that my mind was blown by the movie universe. Don't get me wrong. I had seen Star Wars and the Godfather, and many other good films, but this was something new. Not because it was a comic book movie, but it was a Spiderman movie. Spiderman is my favorite superhero of all time. I had read the comics, I had seen a lot of the TV shows, and to see something so awesome come to the big screen and look real.
Of course... Spiderman is a very easy character to make a movie about around that time. It was a great success and this opened the door to many other films. Some good, some bad... (I'm looking at you Ang Lee)

Then, something strange happened. See, it was something that movie goers had missed for the longest time. Continuity. It is a beautiful word. It connects and creates a sense of universal belonging.
When did this word come into play?
Well, After 2003, movies would be very alone. I'm not talking about the lack of sequels... Oh No... But they would stand alone. One movie after another. And there is nothing wrong with that. People would actually enjoy it. A movie that would be bad, would just be bad and be forgotten. And the good movies would be remembered forever.
Then 2008 came along and the game changed. We had three main movies that changed the way that movies are seen.

What made these films special?
Well, the first two were connected. Not a sequel, but a universe.
When I saw these first two films, I saw a possibility of a world where my favorite characters would meet and would defeat the bad guys. It was no longer about the story of the movie, it was about the characters of the film. They could have shown Iron Man (or Robert Downey Jr.) in a tutu, dancing to ballet and the Iron Man armor next to him drinking scotch and I would have gone crazy. Why? Because the illustration of Iron Man was right in front of me. The closest thing to reality. That is what cinema is.
And so, Marvel started to make the films that a few years ago, were impossible to create.
Technology and talent met, and created awesomeness
But what about the third film? It's not Marvel. Its the opposite. No bright colors, no quick responses. In fact, it was dramatic, heavy and you felt the tension that was created.
Christopher Nolan took a different turn. A turn of reality. He showed the world where Batman COULD exist, but made it as real as possible. There was no crazy arc reactor that would blow up and kill only one man. An explosion felt heavy and you can almost sense all of the people who were suffering by it.

So, why am I bringing these up?
Because Marvel is changing it's strategy. Marvel can no longer sustain the idea of "just the character will suffice" They need a good story. They need some "drama" to happen, so that we can see that the characters are coming to a real seriousness, while still maintaing a sense of seriousness.
Enter Guardians of the Galaxy.

SPOILERS AHEAD
Why is GoG a change in the game? Because it is one of the most serious films that Marvel has ever shown. Not kidding.
The movies begins with the mother's death of the main character. That is pretty gloomy. It creates a true emotion.
Then we have the death of Groot. Who changes his language to create another emotional moment with Rocket Racoon.

Even though the film is filled with funny one liners, and awesome actions shots, there is a sense of seriousness that overshadows the entire film.
What happens? In the end, the main character has a vision of his mother, asking to take her hand (because he didn't when she was dying). That is great emotional manipulation. Make the character grow up by the death of the loved one. The same happens in Batman.


But what about Continuity???! Our word of the day?
Well, knowing that the movies will be connected, we know that both GoG and the Avengers will meet. We can only assume, that it will not just be a clashing of characters on the big screen. The audience wants more than that. They will go for serious drama and action.
Something grave and dark will happen. It will not be a victory.
That is my prediction. I may be completely wrong. (I hope I'm not) I would pay to see something gloomy and dark and serious
Why?
Well, my older brother once told me that a good movie is not judged by the emotion that one is left with at the end of it.
(I got pretty excited at the end of Ghost Rider... but the movie sucks...alot)
A good movie is judged by how much the movie actually made sense. How much the story was able to bring the audience into the story. Dark Knight made that perfectly. The avengers had several shots of the different characters coming towards the camera. Inserting us in the film. When these two main universes collide, it will bring us all together. With the idea of Continuity, it will just build up a great web that will encompass all of us.
But what do you think?
Do you think that I am wrong? Is Marvel not being smart? Or maybe through another angle?
Do you even like Marvel films?

The beast of the Southern Wild

Yesterday I did something I haven't done in a while... Watch a "deep" movie. 

Well... technically, we saw 2 films

The first one was "The Secret Life of Walter Mitty".

I wish I had more to say about this film. A lot of people like to either hate it or love it. I've read and seen people being really opinionated about it. 

I like the film, its a nice innocent film where Ben Stiller is just being himself in a very special way. Something that I liked was the music... 

Listen to this one song... it's like a perfect workout song. 

Maybe later I will talk more about this film, cause I did end up having a great conversation about the deeper meaning of it. 

But that will be for another time. 

This time I want to talk about this movie. "Beasts of the Southern Wild"

Here is the trailer 

Just from the trailer, you can tell that it's one of those films. One of those films that don't follow the normal structure of three acts to tell a story... But rather a film that by the end of it, you just sit there and try to think what just happened. 

Movies like this are very dangerous... They tread a fine line between entertaining film and a movie that is meant to create thought. A dangerous film, because, if people don't see it in the right light, it can be seen as a bad film. On both ends... Because as an film of entretainment... it will not be entretaining enough... and as a deep film... it will be too much of a commercial blockbuster to create a deep thought. 

So, it can get caught on a limbo. But, of course, people will not understand what I said in the previous paragraph... so let's just try to not understand it, and accept it.

But this movie brings a good subject to talk about in film. 

The entire range of films that are made for thought is always a set of movies I try to stay away from. Not that I don't like them. And because of this, I am probably missing a good deal of great movies out there. 

But the reason I avoid these films is because I am the product of J.J. Abrams and Michael Bay and the one guy who made the 1999 Godzilla film.

It's all about action and explosions. I like the thrill of Jason Bourne driving a car through the city while the bullets are whizzing by his hair. 

This is not something I am proud of. It has taken me a while to actually get into the films that are not action or thriller or all kinds of horror. Films like Beast of the Southern Wild, are creating (for me) a bridge that I can cross from the realm of Marvel films (which are not bad) to a place where cinema is more than just a medium to tell a story, but a medium to send a message to people about a certain subject. 

I am proud to say that I enjoyed this film alot... and from now on, I'll try to dive deeper into a realm of cinema that I haven't explored yet

That is all I have to say about that 

First things First: Source Material

To be talking about the subject of movies... one has to understand them. One has to look deeper. One has to study some sort of pattern to see what kind of movies are good and what kind of movies are just plain out wrong.

Thankfully, I've had my sources.

My opinion of movies has grown due to these people. These people have taught me what to look for in movies. 

These are the people that have seen movies in ways that no one else has. Some of them are pretty famous. Others are not. 

1) Siskel and Ebert (R.I.P.)

Oh. These guys are the best. 

I've stayed up until 3 am watching review after review of their films. These guys know how to analyze a film and know how the film industry works. If they see a bad film, they are not afraid to call it out on it's B.S. 

Here is an example. 

Long time ago, there was a movie called North (Starring Elijah Wood) Here's the trailer:

Pretty bad... Of course... I never saw the film. But, what got me interested in it was what these guys said

Now... of course.... this is just one example... But what they say about films is pretty good. They have no limitations on what they wanted to say. I started to see films different because of these guys. 

These guys created a very professional (but blunt) way of looking at films. Not pleasing to other people... but with defining terms and having a strong stand on what you believe. 

2)

The nostalgia Critic

 This guy is frikking amazing. 

Sure, he swears... ALOT. But his opinion is the one I have in high value. He sees films in a more comedic way, but also very real. How they affect the audience and how the film works within itself. 

He reviews bad movies. His stuff is pretty good. I really respect everything he says. I suggest you check him out, but only if you are comfortable with swearing... ALOT of it. 

3) My own brother.

My brother is a very straightforward man. But the thing I learned from him was to look for the hidden things. 

He once told me all the things that went wrong within the Desolation of Smaug movie... in one scene...

When he said that... I was amazed... 

I never looked at that one particular scene like that. He saw it in such a way that no one could have done so.

Last, but not least My faith

Yes... faith is a critic. A harsh one. To have a catholic faith and to be a movie critic is very hard. You have to know what you believe so that you can look at the film in a certain lense. Does it make sense? What kind of message is it bringing to the masses? How will this affect the thought process of millions of people who watch it. 

Being a Catholic and a cinephile (Person who LOVES going to the movies) is a very hard thing to do. But it is a challenge that I've always loved.

So... those are my sources of inspiration. 

A lot of my comments are going to sound the same or some jokes might get repeated. But that is because these people helped me create a very solid opinion on a film

I still don't know what kind of movie I will review first, but hopefully, it will be a good one.

A movie blog... gee that's original

Hi...
My name is Mauricio Carranza...
I've been an avid movie watching/game playing/LOTR enthusiast/GEEK since I can remember.
For the last few years, I've been developing something that many people think that is very dangerous... an opinion!!!

Yes... I have my own opinion about film and cinema.
Granted... I've never studied cinema... and, in some cases, my opinion about certain movies is just plain wrong... I like movies that I shouldn't like... and dislike films that I should love...

Well, I decided to start a blog, because my facebook statuses about films were getting too long.

So, this is it..
A blog about movies...
past/present/future...
I will talk about it... and try to be as unbiased as I can

I will fail.

Well. If you all have some sort of movie request you want to hear about and know what I think... tell me...

cause I know that you all are craving for my opinion

Bye