Common Point of View Review

Media: Video Game
Genre: FPS
Production Year: 2010
Production Company: Electronic Arts
Platform Availability: Xbox 360, PS3, PC
Platform Reviewed: PS3
Rating: M

Overview:
A sequel to the original, you play a soldier in the most unconventional squad in the US Army. With the same rag tag group of guys, you shoot and blow up anything and everything around you all in an effort to save the United States from eventual take over from the looming evil Russian army. You soon uncover a conspiracy that runs back to the Second World War, and have to bring the conspirators to justice with your trusty grenade launcher and machine gun.




Overall: 9.67
The first Bad Company game was a little lame. The aiming system, dumb AI, and a weak story line made for just “meh” game play. This sequel took all of the bad things from the first game, and kept only the good. The fully destructible environments change game strategy completely. In the first game, structures were partially destructible, pillars and general structural integrity were kept intact, while the walls and doors could be obliterated. In this iteration, everything from buildings, cars, even concrete barricades can be completely removed from the game with enough explosive force. The programmers have even made it so that different materials react uniquely to each types of fire, depending on the caliber of the shot. A door can be eliminated with a knife or pistol fire, but a concrete barricade takes a significant explosion. The enemies have a smart AI, taking cover to hide from your onslaught, and flanking you when you don’t advance. The game is a masterpiece of programming that should be considered for Game of the Year for 2010, even though it’s only March.



Presentation: 10
This game stands out as one of the best I have ever played. The single player campaign is fun to its core. I will go into the single player more later on, for now let’s just say it could never end and I would be perfectly happy. The multiplayer is the best of its kind, in my opinion. COD: MW2 set the standard for the FPS multiplayer experience, but there is a new rival found in Bad Company 2. With a very similar customizable load out and “perk” (called “specializations” in Bad Company 2) the primary difference would be the scale. The maps in Bad Company 2 are massive, allowing for some incredible battles. While COD: MW2 is more of a “Rambo” type experience, where you can run off on your own and try to dominate, Bad Company 2 focuses more on squad and team cooperation to achieve certain objectives. If you hate playing nice and want to destroy your enemy all by yourself, this is not the game for you. Here your kill death ratio really doesn’t matter, its how your team does as a whole that will decide a battle.



Story Line: 8
In the first Bad Company your group has one goal in mind, stealing as much gold as possible. You kill and destroy anything in your way. Here you are sent on a mission to save the United States from certain doom, again killing and destroying anything in your way. The story line is good, and it works well. The characters in your team provide leadership and comic relief at times. Taken as a whole, the plot and story line are a little cliché, but the presentation makes all the difference.



Graphics: 10
The graphics in this game are awe inspiring. More than a few times, pretty much every level, I found myself taking a moment from the action and just looking around at all the beautifully rendered landscapes and settings. Every detail, from the soldiers clothing and animation, the buildings and structures, the vehicles, the trees and forests, to the vast sprawling mountains and flowing water made for an experience like I have never seen in an FPS. COD: MW2 has some amazing graphics, but the vastness and far reach of the rendered backgrounds of Bad Company 2 take it to another level. The only game to compare it to would be that of Uncharted 2, the undisputed 2010 Game of the Year. The vehicles make you feel invincible with the power they wield, and there are so many of them you hardly drive the same one twice. The weapons feel powerful in your hand, giving the perfect balance of recoil and punch, each one being slightly different from the last. The variety of weapons and load outs, for single player and multiplayer, make for a unique experience. No two players will play the game in the same way.



Sound: 10
With the sounds of explosions of destruction behind you, enemies calling out commands in front of you, and the helicopter above you raining down bullets on your squad, you feel like you’re right in the action. Your squad leader yelling out orders to you while you are trying to locate your enemy behind the smoke from his gun fire, your senses are tested like they never have been. Sounds changing depending on your location, direction of travel, what’s around your and where your facing, it seems as though you are really in the thick of it. The sounds of the guns you use to bring destruction vary from gun to gun, making each unique. The sound in this game is used and perfected just as much as the graphics and game play, enveloping you in a battle for your life.



Controls: 10
Intuitive and easy to learn, the controls seem natural. Everything from on the ground foot battle, to even all of the vehicles you use. Each vehicle has its own controls, but the combination of on screen control explanations and intuitive design makes the experience fun instead of daunting. You don’t need to memorize crazy button configurations, instead just do what seems natural, and that is what you use.



Fun Factor: 10
If you haven’t noticed by now, I love this game. It is my new crack. This game, for me, replaces and surpasses COD: MW2 like a cheetah passes a tortoise in a foot race, there is no comparison. I will be playing this game for a long, long time.


Click Here!

Media: Movie
Genre: Action/War/Drama
Production Year: 2010
Rating: R
Presentation Availability: Standard
Presentation Reviewed: Standard
Official Site Link: Green Zone

Synopsis:
Chief Warrant Officer Roy Miller (Matt Damon) leads his Army squad in the hunt for weapons of mass destruction (WMD's) in the modern day Iraqi War. As each of Miller's targeted WMD areas turn up empty, he finds himself entangled in the lies of the U.S. Government. Fighting to find answers, Miller goes rogue in an attempt to uncover the truth.

Overall Average Score: 8.00
Green Zone is an overall entertaining film that will most likely touch close to home due to the ultra realistic subject material - the Iraq War. Matt Damon is great as usual.

Writing: 9
I was extremely compelled by this story and at many times found myself getting very angry with certain characters and their beliefs/motives. With a story vividly detailing the ongoing conflict in the middle east and the somewhat shady reasons for its beginning, lines will be drawn and sides will be taken. Without getting too political, I have to say that I was elated to find this movie tackle the moral dilemma most Americans have come to face - Were we lied to about weapons of mass destruction? Why are we in Iraq? Whether you agree with the war or not, Brian Helgeland has created a politically smart and compelling screenplay delving into current issues that plague us all.

Acting: 8
Matt Damon, following in the footsteps of his Jason Bourne character was great. I am a big Matt Damon fan and I am almost always pleased with his roles. He was extremely believable as Chief Warrant Officer Roy Miller. I don't see any Academy Awards in Damon's future for this role but you will not be disappointed. I was caught off guard by Yigal Naor's performance as Iraqi General, Al Rawi. Even though he is the "bad guy", you almost sympathize with his character and his motives. His humanity and nationalism is almost spotlighted, turning the table on certain U.S. officials who would want Al Rawi demonized.

Directing: 8
Another stellar vision brought to life by Paul Greengrass (The Bourne Supremacy, The Bourne Ultimatum). I love his ability to bring a unique stylization to combat scenes. He created a realistic view of modern day war and highlighted the many questions surrounding our (U.S.) reasons for being there. Great cinematography and authentic use of language barriers that are encountered on a daily basis during the current war waged in the middle east. I enjoyed Greengrass' use of Freddy, an Iraqi who tips Damon's character off to a meeting of high-ranking Iraqi officials and then becomes Damon's translator. Knowing someone close to me that has been on several tours to Iraq as an interrogator, I have come to understand the high importance of translators during our stay in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Photography/Special Effects: 8
Great effects highlighted in the gun fights. I really enjoyed the fly-thru cut scenes of the bomb riddled Iraqi cities. The destruction and devastation was eerily captured to render a true to life portrayal of modern day war in the middle east. Getting glimpses through soldiers night vision scopes also adds to great filming style.

Soundtrack/Sound Effects: 7
Explosions and gunfire illuminate the screen. The rumbling of helicopters and missiles rattle the bass. If you are not able to or intending to see this film in the movie theaters, you should at least try and see it somewhere with a good surround sound system. The sound effects really add the films intensity.

Choreography (fighting/dancing): 8
The gun fights and war related combat are highly realistic and intense. Very well done and during many scenes I felt as if I were actually watching live war footage. I particularly enjoyed a scene where Matt Damon's character is provoked into a physical altercation with a U.S. special forces member. I found the choreography of this fight scene to rely heavily on raw passion and the circumstantial chaos, not flawless martial arts sequences.
Click Here!

Media: Movie
Genre: Adventure/Family/Fantasy
Production Year: 2010
Presentation Availability: Standard/3D/IMAX 3D
Presentation Reviewed: 3D
Official Site Link: Alice in Wonderland

Let me preface my review by saying this, you may have a better viewing experience if you go to a late night viewing with less little kids talking and yelling and kicking the back of your seat!! I can't stand having the back of my seat repeatedly kicked, even after asking politely for it to stop.

Synopsis:
I will not bore you with an in depth synopsis for I am sure that most everyone has seen one of the several versions of "Alice in Wonderland" at some point in their lives. Tim Burton's version is not a retelling of Alice's adventure, but a sequel to the original story. You will now be following a 19-year old Alice returning to Wonderland, long after her original quest, to find her true destiny.

Overall Average Score: 7.67
Visually stunning! I am extremely pleased with the renewed style of filming in 3D. Before "Avatar's" release in 2009, 3D films had been very limited in the use of 3-Dimensional cinematography. It was primarily used as a "wow" factor, having objects flying at your face, that's it. Then, with "Avatar", James Cameron stunned us all with his innovative creation of Pandora, a completely 3D planet. This was the first time, we as viewers were completely and entirely submersed in a 3-dimensional world on the big screen. With "Avatar" raising the standard of 3D films, I was definitely curious as to how Tim Burton would handle his portrayal of "Alice in Wonderland". I am happy to say that Burton didn't let me down. He as well has created a visually spectacular "wonderland", putting aside the former campy use of 3D. With that said, this is still a childrens film with a PG rating. It was fun and entertaining, maybe more satisfying for a younger audience, but I would still recommend you taking advantage of seeing it in theaters, either in IMAX 3D or 3D.

Writing: 6
The story has already been defined by 19th century English writer, Lewis Carroll in "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland" and it's sequel "Through the Looking-Glass". This screenplay adaptation from Linda Woolverton was the film's weakest link for me. Woolverton has written major screenplays for Disney movies in the past (The Lion King, Mulan, Beauty and the Beast). This story, although entertaining, lacked a deeper, sometimes hidden (to children) message that most "grown-ups" can really grasp. It was a typical, light/treading on the dark side (for PG that is) fantasy story. I suppose it was targeted more towards a younger audience.

Acting: 8
If you're like me and really loved Burton and Johnny Depp's first teaming in "Edward Scissorhands", were somewhat disappointed with "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" and highly anticipated their most recent teaming in this film; you can rest assured that the chemistry is back. Depp, since the early 90's has been a mainstay atop my favorite actors list. His performance as the Mad Hatter was really remarkable, weird and twisted, but remarkable. As for Alice (Mia Wasikowska), while being the main character, I believe she was almost forgettable in comparison with the rest of the cast and characters in the film. One of the best roles was the Red Queen (Helena Bonham Carter). A lot may in fact be attributed the special effects and make up, but Carter's on screen charisma and presence shines through.

Directing: 8
What can I say, Tim Burton has done it again. Even though I may not have absolutely love this movie, I can definitely appreciate what Burton created. Undeniably fun and entertaining, visually striking and perfect direction for Depp and Carter. Some of Burton's films I absolutely love (Edward Scissorhands, Batman Returns), while others I absolutely hate (Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, Batman Forever). This one may not fall in either category but quite certainly edges closer to the "love" side of the scale. Also as I mentioned before, I am extremely pleased with Burton's use of 3D.

Photography/Special Effects: 9
The special effects and make up were by far the best part of this movie. Really creative and innovative in regards to the CGI and make up. The special effects crew may very easily help this movie win some awards in the upcoming year. From the Mad Hatter's make up and costume, to the animated talking animals, I was blown away. You will not be disappointed. I must say again - to fully capture the visual experience, you should definitely see it in 3D.

Soundtrack/Sound Effects: 8
The soundtrack was well done and went with the flow of the movie. The sound effects were above average, really adding that extra umphf to an already visually superior piece. The roaring bass really helped engulf the viewer, bringing you even more into Alice's wonderland. I always feel that as long as a soundtrack and sound effects don't get in the way of the film's flow, it can't be bad. You usually wont find me raving about a soundtrack unless it is a paramount piece of the film (just and FYI).

Choreography (fighting/dancing): 7
While having some battle scenes, none were mind blowing or forever memorable. Though being a PG movie oriented towards a younger audience I can forgive this. There was small dance number at the end of the movie by the Mad Hatter that was quite unexpected and fun.
Click Here!

Media: Video Game
Genre: FPS/Horror
Production Year: 2009
Production Company: Warner Home Video Games
Platform Availability: Xbox 360, PS3, PC
Platform Reviewed: PS3

Overview:
As a prequel to F.E.A.R., you play as a First Extraction Assult Recon (F.E.A.R.) soldier. Your mission is to extract a doctor from her apartment building and escort her to saftey. Seems simple enough. After a nuclear explosion all hell breaks loose. Not to mention that there is the ghost of a dead girl, named Alma, that is terrorizing you and your team, making you hallucinate and generally scare the s**t out of you. Your goal is to survive, save whoever you can, and kill Alma.

Overall: 7
WARNING!! This game will scare the ever loving piss out of you. There were many times I had to stop for a while and let my heart start again. I started sweating, got very twitchy and jumpy. I loved it. I love to watch movies like the Ring and the Omen. This game has it's faults, but the combination of great sound and very creepy game play makes for a terrifying experience. It is one thing to watch it in a movie when it is happening to someone else, but when you have a controller in your hand, it is happening to YOU. Play at your own risk, but I loved it!



Presentation: 6
I ran into a few issues with programming glitches, some more major than others. Your character can run long distances, vault cars, leap over gaps, climb ladders, but gets hung up on a six inch curb, or has trouble walking around a hand railing sometimes. There were a few clipping errors, but they were few and far between. I got to one part where I needed to walk around a factory and get to the other side of some equipment by climbing ladders and such. There are invisible trip wires that when you hit it, something happens and the story progresses. I accidentally found another way around that the game didn't intend for me to go, and it threw off the story line because I didn't hit the story line progression trip wire. A little annoying, but once I hit the next one it was fine. The background sound cut out a few times, but nothing huge. The explosions are beautiful. The guns feel powerful and effective, even though there is not a huge selection to choose from. The interface and HUD work great and don't clutter the screen, which can be annoying. I gave it a lower score because while none of the glitches are a big deal on their own, added up they get to be really annoying.



Story Line: 6
The story is amazing.....until the last ten minutes. The story is engaging, making you want to continue and save the day. You are given very clear instructions on what to do, and a very linear path to follow. The progression plot points are done in a clear and concise manor, giving you only the information you need leaving the mystery for later discovery. Then the ending. It is a little anti-climactic. It is almost as if the writers wrote this amazing story, then the programers told them to shorten it because they didn't feel like programming as much. Amazing plot and progression then they just threw in the ending as an after thought. The ending isn't very well thought out, presented, or explained. I was left not knowing what had just happened, or how to feel about it.




Graphics: 7
The graphics are great. The game is presented in 720p, which will look great on any screen. A few frame rate issues, but those can be overlooked. Beautiful explosions and gun fire make for an amazing experience. Major props have to be given to the programmers for the lighting effects. They are OUTSTANDING. The shadows, erie lights, dark corners, and the use of fog and particals add as much to the story as what is being said and presented to you.



Sound: 8
The sound is one of the greatest parts of this game. I have a Bose theater system, and it sounds amazing. If the visuals and graphics are amazing, the sound is breathtaking, literally. From Alma creaping up on you, to all of her minions' noises and scratches, the sound adds a completely different element to the game play that is so under utilized by so many other games, even those in the same genre. The sounds will haunt your dreams, and terrify you to your core, and that's a good thing.

Controls: 7
The controls are ok. Just ok. A standard has been developed for the button layout in the FPS genre, and F.E.A.R. 2 strays from this a little. The controls, once you figure them out are good, not great. There where a few times where I was wanting to aim or shoot, and I wound up throwing a grenade or something, but that could be just because I am an idiot.

Fun Factor: 8
The fun factor for this game is really high. The story (minus the ending), the graphics, and the sound make for an incredibly engaging game. I love FPS games. It is my favorite genre of games to play. And I love horror movies. This game is hands down the best mariage of the two. I was on the edge of my seat begging for as much as my heart could take. This game, despite all of its flaws, is really really fun to play.

Click Here!

Media: Movie
Genre: Action/Sci-Fi/Thriller
Production Year: 2009

Synopsis:
In the near future, VSI, a technology company has invented life-like robots, fully customizable and controllable by it's human counterpart. Human to human contact is almost unthinkable, with exception to remote "robot-hating" human clans scattered across the world, forced into seclusion. With crime and racial tensions nearly exterminated, the human clans appear outnumbered. Until a series of homicides start popping up...bringing FBI agent Tom Greer (Bruce Willis) out into the real world, away from the safety of his surrogate, for the first time in many years.

Overall Average Rating: 7.50
Very interesting and thought provoking. I continuously found myself contemplating the prospective reality brought forth in "Surrogates". I mean, think about it. If you were to tell someone from even the early 1900's about the technology we would have readily at our fingertips today, they may very easily think you were crazy, out of your mind. The graphics/CGI were very well done and blended in seamlessly. I enjoyed this film but am glad that I waited for it on Netflix.

Writing: 8
Intelligent and unique portrayal of the future of mankind. The story alone I found very intriguing. The whole concept of humans retreating to the shelter and safety of their homes, hiding behind their ideal image personified within their surrogates kept me pondering the posible reality we may encounter. I know, I know...this may seem far-fetched for some of you reading this, but to think about how much technology has advanced in just the past 20 years is remarkable. I couldn't help myself from thinking about the what-ifs. How crazy would someone from the 1940's think you were if you revealed the common technology available to the everyday person of today? Also encompassing a few twists and turns that may throw you for a loop, there is strong sense of rediscovering human needs and desires that have been deeply suppressed within the surrogate lifestyle.

Acting: 7
You're not going to find any remarkable performances here, but with that said, the acting was completely sufficient for the film. I thought it was a typical role/performance from Bruce Willis and Ving Rhames as The Prophet was just ok. It was no where near the two's teaming in "Pulp Fiction" (one of my all-time favorites), but I don't think anyone else cast in their place would have made the movie any better.

Directing: 8
I found it refreshing how Jonathon Mostow interpreted the screenplay and brought it to the big screen. By taking the futuristic concepts and technology portrayed in this film and not making the entire setting overstylized and advanced made the story much more believable. I'm really glad it wasn't another take on "The Fifth Element" with flying cars and out of this world wardrobes.

Photography/Special Effects: 9
The special effects and CGI was the glue that really held everything together. Touchstone Pictures definitely produced in the effects category. This is most effectively displayed when the surrogates encountered any bodily destruction; having their skin ripped off, revealing their metal skeleton with green liquid oozing from their insides.

Soundtrack/Sound Effects: 7
With no note worthy soundtrack, the sound effects were well done. Like I stated before, by not overdoing elements that many sci-fi films tend to engage in, it made for a much more enjoyable experience.

Choreography (fighting/dancing): 6
Although this was an action/thriller, there weren't many hand to hand fight scenes. Due to that, this is a hard section to rate.

Media: Movie
Genre: Romantic Comedy
Production Year: 2010
Official Site Link: Valentine's Day

Synopsis:
Following the love lives of many different people, this star cast (Julia Roberts, Ashton Kutcher, Jessica Biel, Jamie Foxx, and many MANY others) covers every flavor of love from man and pet, to man and man, not excluding the obvious man and woman.

Overall: 6.6
In 2003, the Brits made the classic chick flick Love Actually. I am a man that is comfortable enough in his sexuality to admit that I like to sit with my wife and watch a good chick flick from time to time. Love Actually has become a staple classic in our house, a tradition of watching it every Valentine's Day has been kept for many years now. But will this new "Valentine's Day" movie dethrone the reigning champion? I really don't think so. The movie is very well done, on all levels, but it falls just short of the classic benchmark set by our fellows across the Pond. Still a great movie, smartly written and very amazing, just not quite as good.

Writing: 8
The comedic timing of Katerine Fugate is impeccable. This is the kind of movie that covers an entire gambit of emotions. Everything from sadness to joy. Everyone relates to at least one or more of the characters stories, whether it is the one who got cheated on, or the high school young love, everyone relates to one of the many stories. The intricate stories, interlaced with comedy make this a very enjoyable movie on any level.


Acting: 5
This movie has the greatest cast list I think I have ever seen! I can't even begin to list the amazing all stars that grace this movie. Even the supporting and background cast is incredible. Of course, just paying out a huge paycheck to a great cast doesn't mean you are guaranteed an amazing film. The cast, while being mostly A list, just does a mediocre job. the actors that did do a great job, you only see them for a short time, little snipits at a time. You are left wanting more from a specific story line, thinking that there was something missing, or a talent un-tapped.

Directing: 6
The film progression is not in question. The arrangement of stories and the way they are told is well done. The film editing leaves something to be desired, wanting more from each story than you are given. Every movie needs an introduction, build up to the climax, climax, and resolution. This movie follows that form very well, commendable even. Keeping a progression in this format with so many stories at the same time is difficult to do. This movie keeps the progression going very well, just nothing special.

Photography/Special Effects: 8
The locations chosen for this film are great. Water ways, roof tops, coastlines, and restaurant locations are perfect for film. The sights are amazing, very effectively showing off Los Angles wonderfully. This is by far the high point of the film. The visuals and locations are simply perfect.

Soundtrack/Sound Effects: 6
The soundtrack is decent. Not perfect, but decent. I could have done without so much country music, but that is just my taste. Bringing drama and emotion to the parts of the movie where it needed it, the soundtrack adds to the film, as opposed to taking away from it. I could have used a little more though, using the music to fill the quieter spots and telling me what emotion I am supposed to be feeling.

Choreography (fighting/dancing): N/A
The one dance scene in the movie is in a wedding. The feeling is supposed to be an un-organized group of people dancing and having fun, and it does it well. But since this is not a choreographed dance, this category has not been considered in the final score.

Click Here!

Media:  Movie
Genre:  Indie Drama/Dark Comedy
Production Year:  2009
Official Site Link:  Sunshine Cleaning

Synopsis:
Rose Lorkowski (Amy Adams) is a single mother trying to work out how to pay the bills and raise her son Oscar (Jason Spevack) all on her own.  Being a maid just isn't working.  Deciding to make a change, she starts her own cleanup business with her sister Norah (Emily Blunt) cleaning up crime and death scenes.  This, all the while having an internal competition with her old high school friends who all seem much more successful than her and trying to fall in love.

Overall:  5
Whenever someone says that a movie is an "indie" everyone has one of two reactions.  Either, "Awesome,  I can't wait to see it", or "Really?  Maybe I'll skip it."  This movie will not change your mind, whatever your response is.  There are basically two sub-groups of indies in my opinion.  There are the "main stream" indies, (Eternal Sunshine, Requiem for a Dream) and obscure indies (Pi, Kontrol).  This would deffinetly fall under the more main stream genre.  I would compare it to "Everything is Illuminated", but a little more "real".  When watching a movie, whatever ind it is, I want to be taken away.  I want to be engrossed in the story, the characters, the visuals, the sound, something that takes me away from reality and puts me into a place where anything can happen.  A world with fat guys in a little coat, with valet drivers that take a Ferrari for a drive and jump it, where a guy can jump a shark on water skis and still have the perfect hair due.  This movie is just a little to "real."  It feels like you are more watching the day to day of someone living in the same real world that I live in.  My world is a lot more boring than what happens on screen.  I don't want to watch a movie in my world.  I want to watch a movie based in the world where the good guy always wins, and yells out "Yippee Kay Ya, Mother F***er!"  This movie just was a little bit to dry and boring for me.

Writing: 4
 Showing the plight of two sisters as they deal with life after the scuicide of their dead mother is a great story.  I get that Megan Holley was trying to show how each of the sisters deals with their mothers death in different ways, all the while trying to survive in their respective harsh realities.  But does it have to be so BORING.  I found myself wanting to get up and do something, my mind wandering away from the movie.  That is not a good thing for a movie.  i can enjoy a good artsy indie film, but this is just to "real" to be at all interesting.

Acting:  7
This is the one redeeming value of the movie.  The parts and the characters are very well portrayed and very well acted.  Having Alan Arkin play the father (Joe Lorkowski) was a great casting choice.  his comedic timing and delivery is a shining star in this otherwise very dull movie.  In a supporting role, his scenes are easily the best and most engaging in the entire movie.  The son, Oscar, is a stand out role.  Jason Spevack plays the role brilliantly, being the kid who doesn't know when to shut up, but still being a loveable character.

Directing:  6
Christine Jeffs moves this train wreck along as best she can with the material given.  There is only so much you can do when you are given a plain jane script such as this.   T many times it seemed as though the story was a little rushed, skipping large chunks of time making the audience infer as to what happened in the gap.  I don't know if this was a writing choice, an editing blunder, or a function of the director.  Whatever it is, the director is supposed to oversee the show, and this one flopped.

Photography/Special Effects:  5
The movie is set in what seems to be a suburb of Los Angles, a desert like, sandy, dry place.  With no real landscape shots, or views showing larger areas than a store front, not much can be said about the photography.  The only real "special effects" were of the crime or death scenes.  No bodies ever, or even body parts (except the one isolated finger in a sink), just lots of blood and "bodily fluids."  It is ll very well done, but nothing special.

Soundtrack/Sound Effects:  4
No memorable sound track, or special effects.  This movie could have been a lot better with a great soundtrack.  There were times when there was silence, watching the characters drive down a street, or talk mellow-dramatically.   These times could have been taken up by a dramatic sound track that could have added to the movie.

Choreography (fighting/dancing): N/A
With no fighting, dancing, or any choreography, this section is irrelevant to the movie and has been taken out of consideration.  It is not included as a part of the overall score.

Click Here!

Media: Movie
Genre: Action/Comedy/Crime
Production Year: 1998

Synopsis:
Melvin Smiley (Mark Wahlberg), is a young, talented hitman in Paris' (Avery Brooks) crime organization. Smiley, along with Cisco (Lou Diamond Phillips), Crunch (Bokeem Woodbine) and Vince (Antonio Sabato Jr.) team up in this action packed comedy to execute the kidnapping of a rich businessman's daughter. The foursome believes this move will land them a huge payday, but soon find out - they made a BIG mistake.


Overall Average Score: 5.50
This is an action-packed comedy that is more silly than serious. There are some very stylized martial arts sequences that are a staple of John Woo films, executive producer, (also produced by Wesley Snipes). If you are looking for a dark and gritty crime-drama than this isn't the movie for you. Instead you will find a light and humorous, action filled comedy in "The Big Hit".

Writing: 5
Initially, I was disappointed with this script, as I was expecting a story more serious than comedic from first time writer Ben Ramsey. But after taking a step back and rethinking it, I appreciate this films humor and almost spoof like treatment of the martial arts theme a little more than my initial review. If you are willing to take it for what its worth, "The Big Hit" does deliver a fun and somewhat entertaining 91 minutes.

Acting: 6
Though there is a fairly large cast of recognizable names (Wahlberg, Bokeem Woodbine, Antonio Sabato Jr., Christina Applegate, Elliott Gould), there is only one stand out performance in my opinion. Lou Diamond Phillips as Cisco, really steals the show. He is over-the-top funny as Cisco, Melvin's flamboyant best friend and coworker (another hitman) that ends up betraying and setting-up Melvin Smiley.

Directing: 6
Assuming Kirk Wong was attempting to put a film together that was completely void of realism and depth, only trying to capture the comedic essence from his actors...I guess he succeeded. Not what I was expecting and after further review, not what I usually like but better than the first intake.

Photography/Special Effects: 5
Lots of gunfights and explosions...not to say they were good, but there were a lot. The only way to reason with how overdone all of the effects were is to hope that director Kirk Wong was trying to do so.

Soundtrack/Sound Effects: 4
The soundtrack is sort of corny. The sound effects are exaggerated, adding only some comedic value to the film. Gun shots and bullet-ricochets are very overdone. Sometimes all I could do was laugh, but I suppose that was what they were going for.

Choreography (dancing/fighting): 7
Although you will find many entertaining and skillful fight scenes (blatantly inspired by John Woo), my rating is a only a 7, because of the overall weakness of the film. Many great martial arts films or films involving intense martial arts choreography are somewhat unbelievable and bend the reality of physics. With that said, those said films work only because they are entangled in story lines and cinematography that allow them to work.

Click Here!

Media: Movie
Genre:Thriller/Crime Drama
Production Year: 2008

Synopsis:
Tom 'Turk' Cowan (Robert De Niro) and David 'Rooster' Fisk (Al Pacino) have been partners on the New York City police force for almost thirty years.  They do everything together, from eating to recreation, they are attached at the hip.  Now a serial killer is taking out suspects and the scum of the city, leaving a calling card at every grisly scene.  The hunt for the murder leads to some familiar faces and old suspects that the partners have worked together, calling their friendship and their badges into jeopardy.

Overall Average Score:  7.33
There are movies that you can watch over and over again, whether you know the ending and what is going to happen or not.  This is one of those films.  A junk food movie that has you at the edge of your seat waiting to see what happens next.  You are constantly guessing "I think it was him.....No wait HIM!".  The story is told with such a great mix of action and mystery.  You sympathize with all the characters, wanting even the killer to win.  Of course, you can't miss with this cast.  I mean, De Niro and Pacino, come on!  Does it get better?

Writing:  8
I love the way that this story is told.  The presentation of what little facts they give you about the case is what drives the story.  The sprinkling in of action and what little romance there is, is like the garnish on an already great meal.  The dialog alone in this movie separates it from the rest of the pack.  Other movies and shows in this genre (crime drama) can tend to be heavy on presenting facts and evidence about the case in a very clinical and hard way (**cough**CSI**cough**). The writer, Russell Gerwirtz, presents most of the evidence in smart, but yet still very real and down to earth, dialogue between the characters.  It is truly the dialogue, and in turn the writing, that drives this movie forward.

Acting: 8
What good would dialogue be without someone to deliver it?  And how can you get any better than De Niro and Pacino?  They are classics!  In my humble opinion, they are the top of the top, the best of the best.  I could go on and on, but I wont.  The only reason this movie didn't get a perfect score is for some of the supporting cast.  50 Cent shows off his acting skills, or lack there of, as a club owner/drug dealer.  Other cast members include Carla Gugino, John Leguizamo, and Donnie Wahlberg, all of whom do a descent job, but nothing Oscar worthy.

Directing:  8
The movies progression and vision of its presentation has to be handed to the director, Jon Avnet.  You can have an amazing cast and a great script, but without the directors vision a great movie it would not be.  After directing multiple TV series' and another Pacino movie "88 Minutes", this would definitely be the breakout directing show piece for Avnet.  This showcases his abilities to tell a story and create in the viewer the "want to know more" feeling.

Photography/Special Effects:  7
Being filmed in the city that never sleeps, you can't get much of a better setting.  There aren't really any amazing photography shots, or incredible scenes, nor are there any stand out special effects or explosions.  This story really isn't that kind of a story, and I feel if there were it would have been used more as filler and would have detracted from the story rather than added to it.  So I guess I am glad that there was none of that.  It does get a point above being just average for the makeup effects, however.  There are a few drugged out people, some beaten up people, and some bullet holes that are very believable.  Not over the top, but not understated either.

Soundtrack/Sound Effects:  6
Sound effects are to be used sparingly in a movie of this genre.  Too much, and you can distract from the real story line.  At one point in the movie the sound effects of breaking glass seemed over done, and is my only true complaint about the movie.  The gun effects, and street noise were all very well done, and maintained throughout the film.  The lack of a noticeable soundtrack I think was a directorial choice, and a good one.  Not having a dramatic orchestra following the characters added a darker, more gritty overtone to the movie.

Choreography (dancing/fighting):  7
To my memory there was only one real "fight scene", if you can even call it that.  It was well done and very believable.  It seemed to be over just as quickly as it began, showing that one character completely overwhelmed the other, but I think that was the point.  Well done.

Click Here!

Click Here!

Medium: Starz TV Series
Genre: Action/Adventure Drama
Production Year: 2010

This series is currently running it's first season on Starz. The first five episodes have already aired and you can catch new episodes on Friday nights at 10pm on Starz. Or if you do not have Starz, like me, you can watch new episodes on Netflix instant. I think you will notice a common theme between my posts and Tolashgaulris's posts...we are both strong supporters of Netflix and Hulu.

Synopsis:
This series follows the legend of Spartacus, interpreted through the writing of Steven S. Deknight. Spartacus (Andy Whitfield), a Thracian betrayed by the Roman Empire, ripped from the warm arms of his loving wife (Erin Cummings) and forced into slavery as a Gladiator, sentenced to death, must fight for his life. This is no easy task under new master and gladiator owner, Batiatus (John Hannah) and his scheming, unfaithful wife, Lucretia (Lucy Lawless). A new found life of brutal torture and fatal combat, all in a single hope to find his wife, has become the story of Spartacus; a story of love, betrayal, greed and one mans will to do everything in his power to save the love of his life.

Overall Average Score: 7.17
This is a very intriguing story, following in the same light as "Gladiator" and "300". Not that I believe "Spartacus: Blood and Sand" is equal to either of these films, it does combine aspects of each to make an entertaining television series. The storyline loosely follows the historic accounts of Spartacus and his dramatic rebelling against the Roman Empire to become one of the most revered slaves in all of history. I find it easy to get behind Spartacus's cause, almost rooting for him to prevail. The graphic bloody and violent combat scenes don't hurt either. This series does however have ALOT of nudity, female and male. If nudity and sexuality doesn't appeal to you, then you may want to find a different show. But overall, I find this an enjoyable and appealing show that I will continue to watch.

Writing: 7

Click Here!

Medium:  BBC TV Series
Genre:  Action/Adventure
Production Year:  2006

I know this has been out for a long time, but thanks to the wonders of Netflix instant viewing, I am finally able to catch up on the series.

Synopsis:
Story loosely follows the exploits and adventures of the legendary mythical character of Robin Hood (Jonas Armstrong).  Robin Hood returns from the Crusades to find that his beloved home in the country of England is being ruled with an iron fist by the evil Sheriff of Nottingham (Keith Allen).  Together with his merry men Robin schemes and plots against the Sheriff by stealing from the rich and giving to the poor, all the while foiling the plots of the Sheriff and swooping the Maid Marian (Lucy Griffiths) off of her feet.

Overall average score:  5.5
This is a fun show.  There is nothing standout about it, and no awards will be won, but it is fun.  This is a great show that delivers what you would expect.  It is popcorn entertainment.  Nothing thought provoking or deep.  Nothing that will make you sit back and go wow.  It is fun, mindless entertainment.  Despite all of it’s short comings, you will find yourself tied to the characters and wanting to go back the Sherwood Forest for some more fun and action

Keep reading for the full extended review!

Writing:  6
The shows plot and general theme have already been defined by the original fable of Robin Hood.  The show has some pretty big shoes to fill with the story being a legend and one of the greatest and most widely known stories of all time.  It doesn’t help that the story has appeared man times on screen, everything from black and white in 1933, to Russell Crowe playing Mr. Hood in the upcoming movie coming out this summer, including Robin being played by a talking fox in Disney’s 1973 cartoon rendition.  With all that stacked up against it, the show’s writing is just ok.  Not bad, but not great either.  It seems to be very campy on the same general pranks and hijinks, jokes, one liners and general cheesiness.  That being said, if you look at the show as a whole, the story is engaging and you are left wondering what the characters will do next.  You connect with the characters and their plight, and wand to see them succeed.

Acting:  7
Jonas Armstrong is a very believable Robin Hood.  He isn’t this huge action star that will pull a sword out and cut down the opposition like Conan the Barbarian.  He is a short skinny guy that uses his brain to outwit his foe.  Jonas portrays this well.  All of the dialog, emotions, and action are very well done and he makes you believe he truly is Robin, and not just a guy playing him.  You feel his joy, and his sadness.  That being said, some of the other actors could use some work, starting with his right hand man Much (Sam Troughton).  He is way over the top.  Much is portrayed as the bumbling idiot friend that always seems to be getting into trouble.  Sam’s betrayal of Much though, leaves you more annoyed than amused.  It’s humorous for a little while, then you want to throw something at the television.  The other characters are good, but there are no Oscar winners in the group.

Directing:  3
This is where the show really takes a dive for me.  I think that the show is what it is, despite the directing (John McKay, Mathew Evans, Graeme Harper).  Each episode has something in it that you are just left going “huh?”  The show is supposed to be based in the middle ages, the times of swords and arrows.  Then why did the director choose to have a soldier from the Kings army wear modern military fatigues?  It just doesn’t fit!  And why, when a tattoo is the central focus of the episode, would you not want the tattoo itself to look good and as real as possible?  As opposed to having someone draw it onto the actor with a magic marker and then it fading and smearing through the action sequences.  Many little things like this are the things a director is supposed to see.  These are the minor details that a director is paid for. Yes the director has many other things to do, and they are done moderately well, but so many of these blaring omissions makes the rest of the show seem like an epic fail.

Photography/Special effects:  7
I realize that it is a BBC television show, and they don’t have a big motion picture budget, but can we please not use the same CG graphic of a flying arrow every time?  The arrows flying are really the only special effects needed in this show, however.  Sure there is the occasional explosion or fire, and those are done rather well.  The scenery is beautiful.  You don’t get to many wide panoramic shots of the landscape, but what you do see is green and lush.  The buildings and set design are very well done, even though the same hallway or room seems to be repeated from different angles and you are supposed to believe it is separate.  The homes, castles, and hideouts for the merry men are all very time period specific, and add to the show, rather than detract from it.

Soundtrack/sound effects:  4
I am reminded of Monty Python’s Holy Grail, the same song repeating over and over for every scene no matter what is going on.  Credits, action, drama, the same freaking song!  That and the arrows flying sound like they are patriot missiles somehow.  I didn’t know that arrows were self propelled.

Choreography (dancing/fighting):  6
The fight sequences are fun.  Pure fun.  Your not going to see any great martial arts or sword play.  The bow and arrow work is all CG, so I can’t even count that.  It’s fun to watch, even though there is nothing amazing or new happening on the screen.  I just like to see swords being swung around and people fighting.

Click Here!

So this is the first post of the Common Point of View Review. Here, we will have an overview of electronics, movies, games, TV shows and anything else that we get comments about or requests for. What separates this blog from the rest of the millions of other random sea of blogs out there is that this is a review from an average person's point of view. We are not paid, bribed, or otherwise coerced for our comments or reviews. We will be doing a typical breakdown of each review, on a scale from 1 to 10.

Let us know what you think! This is a review site that wants comments. Let us know what you think and what you want to see reviews of. No promises that we will actually do it, but we will read your comments none the less!