Change Your Image
aliaksar2000
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Lists
An error has ocurred. Please try againThe most important issue when making a listing for a genre is trying to separate apples from oranges. The genre subject to this listings, heist movies is a sub genre of crime movies. Even though it is already a sub genre, if you put all of them in same listing, you will be ending up with this apples-oranges problem.
Where to put a great heist movie intended to be a comedy, sometimes a kind of fantasy among the first class job serious heist movies? Or how can you decide if a heist movie like Inside Man is better than a Dog Day Afternoon, while the second one's concerns are completely different? Does grifting / fraud movies fall to the genre? Can we count the movies for this listing which are simply about stealing but not organized heist? What about the movies whose main action is burglary? And the ones is about trying to get a ransom by committing a kidnapping, but very well organized and told? What about the movies where the stealing action never takes place, but the characters are after already stolen (or lost while stealing) loot?
That's why I tried to divide the genre into 3 main categories to be fair at least to my cinema view. And, of course, I applied my own criteria to judge what movie falls into what group. And even that method was sometimes not enough, so I sub-grouped them with the type of the theft committed. At the end I could call all those movies as 'theft movies' without being have to skip any of them without mentioning. First group is called 'Pure Robbery / Heist Movies'. To me, they are the movies basically:
a. Their plots are serious and b. Can happen in real life although sometimes they are pretty fantasy like and c. And their story concentrates on -generally organized- theft, where we see at least one of first two acts in a satisfactory dose. (Act 1: Introduction/Preparation, Act 2: Stealing, Act 3: Aftermath)
Second group is Caper Movies. They are the movies:
a. No matter what acts of the movies is told/presented in what dose, they are intended to be a comedy in first place. and b. Their plots are humorous and what happens in the movie can't happen in real life or too coincidental to happen.
And the third group is called 'Alternative Robbery / Heist Movies'. Meaning that:
a. Although the movie is most of time absolutely about theft and thieves, it concentrates other matters more than the theft act, therefore falls other genres like drama, adventure, biography before it falls to heist genre or b. Concentrates the thieves more than the theft, so most of the time, they are character studies or even sometimes biographies or c. Separate themselves from other heist / theft movies by having radically different nature or a different grammar or d. Solely concentrates on Act 1 (Preparation) or solely on Act 3 (Aftermath) or concentrates one of these acts much more than other other two acts.
In that point of view, although some movies are considered as caper (like The Sting, Ocean's Eleven) in general, to me they were Pure Robbery / Heist Movies. Or although Quick Change is a comedy heist, since it is as organized as the serious heist movies, and a heist could happen in real life, it isn't a caper movie in my opinion.
My other listings:
Best Robbery / Heist Movies: http://www.imdb.1eye.us/list/ls055508041/
Best Alternative Robbery / Heist Movies: http://www.imdb.1eye.us/list/ls003144920/
Best Caper Movies: http://www.imdb.1eye.us/list/ls003144958/
The most important issue when making a listing for a genre is trying to separate apples from oranges. The genre subject to this listings, heist movies is a sub genre of crime movies. Even though it is already a sub genre, if you put all of them in same listing, you will be ending up with this apples-oranges problem. Where to put a great heist movie intended to be a comedy, sometimes a kind of fantasy among the first class job serious heist movies? Or how can you decide if a heist movie like Inside Man is better than a Dog Day Afternoon, while the second one's concerns are completely different? Does grifting / fraud movies fall to the genre? Can we count the movies for this listing which are simply about stealing but not organized heist? What about the movies whose main action is burglary? And the ones is about trying to get a ransom by committing a kidnapping, but very well organized and told? What about the movies where the stealing action never takes place, but the characters are after already stolen (or lost while stealing) loot?
That's why I tried to divide the genre into 3 main categories to be fair at least to my cinema view. And, of course, I applied my own criteria to judge what movie falls into what group. And even that method was sometimes not enough, so I sub-grouped them with the type of the theft committed. At the end I could call all those movies as 'theft movies' without being have to skip any of them without mentioning. First group is called 'Pure Robbery / Heist Movies'. To me, they are the movies basically:
a. Their plots are serious and b. Can happen in real life although sometimes they are pretty fantasy like and c. And their story concentrates on -generally organized- theft, where we see at least one of first two acts in a satisfactory dose. (Act 1: Introduction/Preparation, Act 2: Stealing, Act 3: Aftermath)
Second group is Caper Movies. They are the movies:
a. No matter what acts of the movies is told/presented in what dose, they are intended to be a comedy in first place. and b. Their plots are humorous and what happens in the movie can't happen in real life or too coincidental to happen.
And the third group is called 'Alternative Robbery / Heist Movies'. Meaning that:
a. Although the movie is most of time absolutely about theft and thieves, it concentrates other matters more than the theft act, therefore falls other genres like drama, adventure, biography before it falls to heist genre or b. Concentrates the thieves more than the theft, so most of the time, they are character studies or even sometimes biographies or c. Separate themselves from other heist / theft movies by having radically different nature or a different grammar or d. Solely concentrates on Act 1 (Preparation) or solely on Act 3 (Aftermath) or concentrates one of these acts much more than other other two acts.
In that point of view, although some movies are considered as caper (like The Sting, Ocean's Eleven) in general, to me they were Pure Robbery / Heist Movies. Or although Quick Change is a comedy heist, since it is as organized as the serious heist movies, and a heist could happen in real life, it isn't a caper movie in my opinion.
My other listings:
Best Robbery / Heist Movies: http://www.imdb.1eye.us/list/ls055508041/
Best Pure Robbery / Heist Movies: http://www.imdb.1eye.us/list/ls003142194/
Best Alternative Robbery / Heist Movies: http://www.imdb.1eye.us/list/ls003144920/
The most important issue when making a listing for a genre is trying to separate apples from oranges. The genre subject to this listings, heist movies is a sub genre of crime movies. Even though it is already a sub genre, if you put all of them in same listing, you will be ending up with this apples-oranges problem. Where to put a great heist movie intended to be a comedy, sometimes a kind of fantasy among the first class job serious heist movies? Or how can you decide if a heist movie like Inside Man is better than a Dog Day Afternoon, while the second one's concerns are completely different? Does grifting / fraud movies fall to the genre? Can we count the movies for this listing which are simply about stealing but not organized heist? What about the movies whose main action is burglary? And the ones is about trying to get a ransom by committing a kidnapping, but very well organized and told? What about the movies where the stealing action never takes place, but the characters are after already stolen (or lost while stealing) loot?
That's why I tried to divide the genre into 3 main categories to be fair at least to my cinema view. And, of course, I applied my own criteria to judge what movie falls into what group. And even that method was sometimes not enough, so I sub-grouped them with the type of the theft committed. At the end I could call all those movies as 'theft movies' without being have to skip any of them without mentioning.
First group is called 'Pure Robbery / Heist Movies'. To me, they are the movies basically: a. Their plots are serious and b. Can happen in real life although sometimes they are pretty fantasy like and c. And their story concentrates on -generally organized- theft, where we see at least one of first two acts in a satisfactory dose. (Act 1: Introduction/Preparation, Act 2: Stealing, Act 3: Aftermath)
Second group is Caper Movies. They are the movies: a. No matter what acts of the movies is told/presented in what dose, they are intended to be a comedy in first place. and b. Their plots are humorous and what happens in the movie can't happen in real life or too coincidental to happen.
And the third group is called 'Alternative Robbery / Heist Movies'. Meaning that: a. Although the movie is most of time absolutely about theft and thieves, it concentrates other matters more than the theft act, therefore falls other genres like drama, adventure, biography before it falls to heist genre or b. Concentrates the thieves more than the theft, so most of the time, they are character studies or even sometimes biographies or c. Separate themselves from other heist / theft movies by having radically different nature or a different grammar or d. Solely concentrates on Act 1 (Preparation) or solely on Act 3 (Aftermath) or concentrates one of these acts much more than other other two acts.
In that point of view, although some movies are considered as caper (like The Sting, Ocean's Eleven) in general, to me they were Pure Robbery / Heist Movies. Or although Quick Change is a comedy heist, since it is as organized as the serious heist movies, and a heist could happen in real life, it isn't a caper movie in my opinion.
My other listings:
Best Robbery / Heist Movies: http://www.imdb.1eye.us/list/ls055508041/
Best Pure Robbery / Heist Movies: http://www.imdb.1eye.us/list/ls003142194/
Best Caper Movies: http://www.imdb.1eye.us/list/ls003144958/
The most important issue when making a listing for a genre is trying to separate apples from oranges. The genre subject to this listings, heist movies is a sub genre of crime movies. Even though it is already a sub genre, if you put all of them in same listing, you will be ending up with this apples-oranges problem. Where to put a great heist movie intended to be a comedy, sometimes a kind of fantasy among the first class job serious heist movies? Or how can you decide if a heist movie like Inside Man is better than a Dog Day Afternoon, while the second one's concerns are completely different? Does grifting / fraud movies fall to the genre? Can we count the movies for this listing which are simply about stealing but not organized heist? What about the movies whose main action is burglary? And the ones is about trying to get a ransom by committing a kidnapping, but very well organized and told? What about the movies where the stealing action never takes place, but the characters are after already stolen (or lost while stealing) loot?
That's why I tried to divide the genre into 3 main categories to be fair at least to my cinema view. And, of course, I applied my own criteria to judge what movie falls into what group. And even that method was sometimes not enough, so I sub-grouped them with the type of the theft committed. At the end I could call all those movies as 'theft movies' without being have to skip any of them without mentioning. First group is called 'Pure Robbery / Heist Movies'. To me, they are the movies basically:
a. Their plots are serious and b. Can happen in real life although sometimes they are pretty fantasy like and c. And their story concentrates on -generally organized- theft, where we see at least one of first two acts in a satisfactory dose. (Act 1: Introduction/Preparation, Act 2: Stealing, Act 3: Aftermath)
Second group is Caper Movies. They are the movies:
a. No matter what acts of the movies is told/presented in what dose, they are intended to be a comedy in first place. and b. Their plots are humorous and what happens in the movie can't happen in real life or too coincidental to happen.
And the third group is called 'Alternative Robbery / Heist Movies'. Meaning that:
a. Although the movie is most of time absolutely about theft and thieves, it concentrates other matters more than the theft act, therefore falls other genres like drama, adventure, biography before it falls to heist genre or b. Concentrates the thieves more than the theft, so most of the time, they are character studies or even sometimes biographies or c. Separate themselves from other heist / theft movies by having radically different nature or a different grammar or d. Solely concentrates on Act 1 (Preparation) or solely on Act 3 (Aftermath) or concentrates one of these acts much more than other other two acts.
In that point of view, although some movies are considered as caper (like The Sting, Ocean's Eleven) in general, to me they were Pure Robbery / Heist Movies. Or although Quick Change is a comedy heist, since it is as organized as the serious heist movies, and a heist could happen in real life, it isn't a caper movie in my opinion.
My other listings:
Best Pure Robbery / Heist Movies: http://www.imdb.1eye.us/list/ls003142194/
Best Alternative Robbery / Heist Movies: http://www.imdb.1eye.us/list/ls003144920/
Best Caper Movies: http://www.imdb.1eye.us/list/ls003144958/
Reviews
Halloween (1978)
Such a waste of time
I watch a lot of movies. All around the world. A lot. Heard about this one for a long time. Wasn't expected much when I saw it but wasn't expecting something that bad, either. Clearly hugely overrated movie. You might like cheap movies, nothing wrong with that. There are some cheap movies (by cheap I mean the low quality) that I love also. Or you might have any other reason to love it. That's all good, too. But the argument says 'it was great when it was released so you need to judge it with that in mind, not by comparing today's movies' is totally empty and invalid for me. There are movies, different genres, much older than this one and they are still great when you watch it today or even probably 50 years later. Even greater than the great movies produced today. A truly great movie is timeless, remains great no matter how many years pass. Maybe one of the most important rule of a great art piece. This one is clearly not.
Küçük Kiyamet (2006)
Neither very bad, nor a very bad movie
*** This review may contain spoilers *** First of all, this is neither a very bad movie, nor a milestone at all in my opinion. It is an average movie. If you look at its standing in Turkish movie industry, then it might be little bit above average.
The story is somehow original *for* Turkish movie industry. The directors say it isn't a horror movie, but there are many elements who belongs to horror genre. Maybe because the directors didn't intended to make a horror, or maybe because it was simply not well done, as a result, the horror elements absolutely fail, which is big minus for the movie. The dialogues weren't that much bad as criticized. I have seen the worse.
The performance of the actors weren't that much bad as criticized, either. On the contrary, the actress, who plays principal female character (Basar Koklukaya) and the young actor (Bora Akkas?) who plays character called Bora was pretty good. Yes, character of Ali wasn't as good as it should have been, but it was not the actor, but the directors. The actor did his best.
Yes, cinematography and music / sound was good. Maybe the best element of the movie.
Yes, sub-text of the movie was the dealing with or accept the death etc but it remains as a nice attempt only.
******SPOILER**** While movie fails to frighten the audience (the directors says it is not a horror movie but the movie has so many elements a typical horror movie has. So not only they failed to make a horror, they also failed *not to* make a horror movie), it makes good attempts cinematicwise for Turkish cinema. As syildirim89 well explained, the collapsing of the building shot an almost 5 minutes uncut long-take shot of the incident scene were technically absolutely above the average for Turkish movies.
Overall nice try. We need attempts like that in Turkish movie industry and the progress will come step by step.
I give 7 out 10, which means average and 'worth to give a shot' for me, but neither 8( 8=good movie) nor 6 (below average).
Korkuyorum Anne (2004)
An average movie
I respect the effort of film-makers in making a movie, which is not cliché. However, it is not a really well-done movie in my opinion. I found the dialogues and the way that actors speak their dialogues artificial. I am afraid, I missed the subtext of the movie, although I am a big fan of the movies, which have deep subtext. However, fine art direction was something to be mentioned. It was too long compared to context, I had a feeling that we had seen several finals during the movie. On the contrary of the some viewer's opinion, I like the way the music was used, nicely done. Overall, since it was not a cliché movie, and comedies and absurd movies are a special genre that everybody has different tastes and not easy to satisfy everybody, I keep my respect for the movie while I am saying that it wasn't my favorite type of the movie.
The Namesake (2006)
Namesake (2006) Mira Nair - India & USA
The story of an immigrant couple and dilemma of the second generation immigrants are well portrayed in the film in general sense. What makes the movie good is its universal language. You can replace Indian immigrants with Chinese, Turks, Romanian, Arabs or others, you can replace the US with England, Australia or else. The story's main lines won't change. An eye-catching characteristics of the movie is its little warm and memorable moments. Especially during the first quarter of the movie, while two main characters, Ashima and Ashoke introduced. This is a plus for movies itself, but little bit arguable for the story. They are like warm touches to a sensitive issue. It makes you feel sympathy for the characters (and immigrants) and wants you to take a side in the issue, while the story never touches to the other side of the coin such as adaptation and cultural problems of immigrants or conservative structure of their lives. The story focuses on a most typical issue on immigrants dilemma in the living countries; Their names: their identities. Which gives a clue from which culture, from which religion you are coming from. Something that sometimes you are proud of and something that sometimes you wish /have to change. Self-criticism is missing in the movie. However, the movie doesn't claim that it is discussing the immigrant issue as a whole. Based on personal experience of an Indian immigrant in the States. So we can forgive that flaw. The movies have the audience's attention easily, flows smoothly. A big plus for the film is it's reaching to its target without any difficulty; the western societies, which continuously welcome ten thousands of immigrant from every corner of the world. So it gives us an extra idea to understand immigrants better, who are clamped, stuck and lost between two lives, two cultures. Sometimes the film repeats its gender's clichés (shrinking clothing washed by Ashima; Ashima's saying she had been missing India for years, then now she would miss The US, etc) but we also see some original approaches like Ashima's memorable quote "Do you want me say 'I love you' like Americans." As for the cinematic structure of the film, personally I don't think that transition in Gogol's personality/life looks very well real. It seems to be little bit rushed. This is not actor's fault anyway. Other than this, Kal Penn's performance is strong. I find her wife's performance little bit overacted. Although we have seen Alex's parents very briefly, we have a good idea about their life style. On the other side, Gogol's parents life could be digged little bit more. The movie's music, cinematography and general atmosphere don't take any risk and follow the film grammar closely. We don't see any cinematic essay, original tricks, surprising editing or else (that's why the movie losses 2 point in my opinion) but we see a smooth, easily-read, nicely done movie. (that's why the movie gets 8 points)
Overall: 8 over 10.
January 2009, Montreal