Gangster Daw?!

7/15/2014 11:14:35 PM

Anong meron sa poster na ito?

www.pinoyscoops.com

Gangster daw.

Whoa. Talaga ha? Gangster ampucha. Bakit ganun namana ng itsura, parang albularyo daw?

Ang daming argumento ukol rito, maliban pa siyempre sa mga papuri mula sa mga tagahanga, sa pelikulang She’s Dating A Gangster ng Star Cinema. Oo, marmaing umaangal, mula na ‘yan sa mga kaliwa’t kanang lupon ng tao mula sa mga lehitimong gangster mula sa mga wannaebeng mga jejemon at ultimong mga KathNiel fans mismo at dun na rin sa mga tagahanga ng nagsulat ng kwentong yan (na by the way, ay isang produkto ng WattPad bago napunta sa Summit Media at Star Cinema).

Oo nga naman. Pucha, bakit ganyan kasi ang itsura?

May isang argumento na ganyan raw ang pagkakadescribe ng nobelista sa karakter na ginampanan ni Daniel Padilla.

Ganun? Oo, ganun nga.

So, kung kidding aside, mukha siyang galing sa panahon ng retro. Ganun? Pero, ganun nga ba ang gangster sa panahon na yun? Parang ang labo lang ah. Mahaba ang buhok, tapos yung headband niya ay parang isang gerilya o isang lehitimong albularyo nga. Parang hindi raw bumagay sa kanya.

Kaso kung ganun man ang pinaglalaban mo, may magagawa ka pa ba?

Kung dikta man ng awtor yan, magagawa ka pa rin ba? Kung sa totoo lang ay hindi naman talaga gangster ang papel niya dyan (at tinawag lang siya na “gangster” kung tutuusin), may magagawa ka pa rin ba?

Ala naman sabihin mong bobo o mangmang ang manunulat o ni ang researcher o wardrobe at production designer ng pelikulang yan, ano?

Pero kung taliwas man ito sa mga prinensentang anggulo, aba’y parang hindi rin naman tama yan. Kasi kung gangster lang naman ang usapan, tumingin ka na lang sa paligid ng Maynila o Nangka, o sa Commonwealth, o sa Sanggadaan, o kung saan pa yan. Makikita mo na karamihan sa mga gangster ay kahalintulad ang itsura sa Grand Theft Auto San Andreas o yung mga ghetto sa West Coast.

Hindi ako fan, at ni hindi rin hater. Pero kung gusto talaga pagmukhain ng pelikula na gangster si DP, eh di gawin nila na kahit papaano ay lehitimong G naman (kahit na OG, mga dre). Dahil sa totoo lang, mukha na yang mediocre eh. Joke time ba. Baka nga kung may nagsusuot ng ganung fashion style sa totoong buhay ay hindi niya ipagyayabang na gangster siya eh.

Kaya sa totoo lang tuloy, nakakkarimarim na lang pansinin na ginagawang katawa-tawa ang mainstream eh. Oo, sabihin na natin na “teka, mali ka, Slickmaster.Namimisinterpret mo lang yata ang pinoportray niya.” Pero ito rin ang problema, at hindi ito para sa sanity ko, kundi para na rin sa mga manunood n’yo (tutal hindi ko naman kaedaran ang SDTG): alam n’yo naman na ang patron niyo ay hindi nakakaunawa ng malalalim na bagay, at siguro yan ang gusto niyong ipalabas (at siguro, este, panigurado, ay marketing strategy na rin yan para manood ang karamihan sa atin ng peklikulang yan). Pero bottom line is, ang labo pa rin eh. Yan, gangster? Come on, give me a break!

Author: slickmaster | © 2014 september twenty-eight productions

Flick Review: Transformers Age of Extinction

07/01/14 05:13:10 PM

I haven't saw the entire Transformers franchise. In fact, it was five years ago when I only saw the Transformers' second flick titled “Revenge of the Fallen” in a movie date which went awkward (it was a trio flick meet-up, by the way).

But forget July 2009 for that matter. After all of those times, I haven't seen neither the first nor the third motion picture of that Hasbro-manufactured action figures.

All I know is that Transformers 4: Age of Extinction showcased a total different plot. Why, 'cause obviously, it's a different time already. Though I personally wondered: if that's the age of extinction, then why are people still... well, are at its same, old phase? They aren't the same extinct personae on any of those super-futuristic-slash-way-too-past-the-modernized-contemporary-era flicks Oblivion?

Well, I can only realized the title speaks for the characters themselves. They were “extinct” to the eyes of then-current generation. Any pieces of Autobots were doomed to perish. However, corruption tooks place either when the government cashed in on a robotics company to generate numerous (however, fluke) models, with concepts clearly copied from both Megatron and Bumblebee.

And no wonder why Mark Wahlberg portrayed the main character instead of just-arrested-recently Shia Labouf. He's on a single-dad-slash-mechanic who just purchased a truck, which turned out, was Optimus Prime. Man-(and truck-)hunt was then the instant resort.

However, the plot turned more complicated than we ever thought. And I can't really tell you much (aside from shying away to do the “spoiler's” role) of that anymore.

For two hours and forty six minutes (2:46) inside the cinema on that Saturday night, what more can I say? No wonder why some movie aficionados–legit critics or just plain reviewers—went awry in dismay. The story was a buster. And some claimed Wahlberg's acting seemed to carry the film over, aside from the flying rusher machines rolling over 3D graphics? Hey, they were partly right!

I haven't seen the previous three prequels yet, but I'd prefer the second (Revenge of the Fallen) over this one (unless the first and third may convinced me to change my word; or on the other side, a fifth movie, since I might foresee that one coming really, really soon).

Or maybe I've hit the wrong mode. I should have seen this thing in 3D (heck, I can't afford to pay its price though).

And also, minus a “movie date.”

The verdict: 5.9

Author: slickmaster | ©2014 september twenty-eight productions

Flick Review: X-Men: Days of Future Past

6/8/2014 11:44:43 AM

Just a short post for now. My apologies in advance.

It’s only during my childhood days when I saw X-Men. And (yes) it was one of those cartoon series I used to watch at Channel 2 (or 9), aside from the Simpsons, Disney Adventures (on channel 7), Hanna Barbera-produced shorts (9), and even Yaiba (5).

But now, I know I’m quite too late for this, but it was the first time I watched a movie installment of X-Men. All I know way back then was Hugh Jackman seemed to be the reel and real main star of the Marvel series since he appeared on several editions including his very own “Wolverine” flick last year (Unfortunately, I was then-jobless which made me unable to see this film at all). Plus, he promoted it on a WWE Raw episode alongside wrestlers DolphZiggler and Damien Sandow, who dressed as “Magneto.”

Now, I got a chance to watch this motion picture a few weeks ago, and no wonder why it was called “Days of Future Past.” It was simply because the entire film was a ‘time machine’—they rolled from the future era backwards, and attempted to change the pace of their history that eventually went successful. Professor X was aging than ever, but Wolverine came back to those days where the guy known as “Xavier” was not even handicapped. And so was Magneto, by the way.

I can’t prejudge this movie to its previous editions yet (since it’s only the first time I saw an X-Men flick at all; so looks like I have a huge “catch-up” task to do, eh?), but I can’t argue even more – it’s good, just like a lot of X-Men fans said. Awesome complex twists and plot. It seems there was no predictability on who the main culprit is nor what’s the main issue (or maybe I have to review the synopsis even more), but that’s alright. Maybe that made me think.

Though all I can say more is that a lesson-like statement—“Any decision or action you will make upon today, will definitely reflect on what you will become tomorrow.” Yes, it will dictate your fate and history.

The verdict: 7 

Author: slickmaster | © 2014 september twenty-eight productions

Flick Review: Bob Ong's ABNKKBSNPLAko?! the Movie

03/‎14/‎2014 12:32:47 AM

I can only express my insights on the movie adaptation of that Bob Ong book in two words: as both 'entertaining' and 'disappointment.'

Yes, it is entertaining because of some antics and factors which appear to be natural in our daily lives.

And, (oh no) disappointing because on a slighter-than-above-superficial level, the movie focused on the romance more than the school-ish aspect itself

Why did I say so? If you looked on the entire book first, you'll realize my primary reason: it became one of the numerous book-to-movie-adaptation failures in recent history.

Well, obviously that's a marketing tactic if you ask me why should you put the ladies like Andi Eigenmann and Meg Imperial for the cast which already comprised by Jericho Rosales and Vandolph Quizon.

And count the love-team factor involving Roberto and his unnamed 'Special Someone' right there (and seriously, it's quite tricky that Andi's character was still unnamed, at the end of the flick eh?).

I first saw its trailer on one of the VIVA-produced channels. And apparently, their Top 10 trailer seemed enough to persuade me. The problem though, is the several factors on the project itself.

As much as I like the numerous flashback devices used in the film, I thought the execution could have been a better one. But don't you just love the idea of recalling these nostalgic materials either? I loved that part, 'coz it simply reminds me of my old days as a student. Those FLAMES, SOS, spirit of the pen... nah, which mattered actually.

However, I still doubt that a 'love team' factor should really be a compulsory to this one. Bob Ong has been selling most of his books without making any such implications on it. In fact, he only relied on three things: his personal experience, society events (I can't tell the current word since everything bound in the books was already 'past'), and comical antics. In addition, the latter two were even enough to earn him six-digit-numbered published copies.

Because it was during our 'high school stage' where we first experience romance and heartbreak? (Hey, count me out, by the way; since I only experienced things like that when I was about to enter college anyway)

Well, maybe, but come on...

The comedy antics in this flick come naturally though. As if I haven't seen any slapstick materials executed just to crack a joke. But seriously, I'd prefer this rather than the present trend where we need to roll a newspaper like a baseball bat, slam it on your friend's head (of course, the upper one), and laugh like it's your last day.

And comparing this film to the other local movies? I still can tell that Bob Ong's ABNKKBSNPlaKo?!'s still a 'standout' among them all; considering that for like 9 times out of 10, the Philippine commercially-produced movies are nothing but bunch of "airheads, no-brainers, and garbage." Hey, count these romantic movies in the list, too.

The problem though is that, timing' seemed to take its toll on them. I wondered why it appeared like they rush to finish the entire picture. And they scheduled it on a post-Valentine's Day period? I think that’s a bad strategy, considering that most movie patrons are still preferring those love-themed flicks than the other.

Maybe if they let their fans wait for a bit longer, the film will be much appreciated (even for a bit) 'cause there are scenes which aren't been made in its total perfection; especially if we're talking about editing here.

Jericho Rosales is a good actor here. Though I also believe (especially it's supposedly an intellectual wit-driven flick) that the likes of Ramon Bautista can handle the job either... or should I say, even "better." However, Rosales' way of narrating several Bob Ong scriptures in the flick is 'music to my ears.' Yes, as if I'm imagining like a real Bob Ong has spoken (but only, on that part).

Vandolph, on the other hand... well, I've got nothing much to say, aside from the fact that his lines has been speaking the very deepest of them all. Think about it, as if you're listening to your parent who, then, is scolding you. It may be annoying, but it really has sense.

About Andi? Hmm... I am still wondering, is this lady does not even get baptized? I know, I loved movies which made me think even more, but we're all looking for answers somewhere out there anyway.

And... holy smoke, is it me or is just Meg Imperial's kinda hot? Hahaha! Okay, seriously speaking. If you asked me to compare the two ladies, I'll pick the latter. Anyway, I think it's kinda fair when she hoisted the role of Portia, a tomboy-character yet damn foxy lady. Nah, does it count? I'd rather reiterate some ideas before everything goes bias shit here.

Going back to the flick, the upside of Bob Ong's first book-to-movie adaptation is that there are some lessons in the movie which targets everyone. Like 'your family will be there in times when you need somebody to talk to,' or 'you should not be ashamed of who you are,' or a lot more. Something I can't tell you here for more (since I think I've reached the length enough).

The soundtracks can be real shit sometimes; but hey, I'd prefer listening to these tracks than... (Do I have to drop names here anyway?)

Overall, it's almost a good intellectual choice, only if:

First, they focused on the much-needed factors (friendship, studies, family) more than the romantic ones (something you can only recognize at the flick's 'current' era and not thru its flashback devices.'

Second, the marketing should have made its timing better. I do believe this flick would have unleashed its more potential should the showing had took place in either graduation days or summer vacation. I also thought that kids would definitely love this should the said scenario pushes through.

That's another saddening thing to notice; 

Third, the depth factor should not have been overshadowed by 'fun.' Rappler was right when they described the movie thru its analysis title itself - 'Fun Overtakes Depth.' And that's really a problem nowadays where film executives have been failed in balancing entertainment satisfaction thru means of providing worthy ideas with the weight of making money. Of course, if you're a businessman, for nine times out of ten, you will prefer to make money more than the other choice. It was the said tactic which actually resulted into disappointment on the moviegoers' part.

And last but not the least; the message seems like sorely lacked. I mean the author's real "message" conveyed by the book. In lieu with that, the movie also lacked substance as its result. If you read the book, you will understand the reason. Others may berate like "come on, slick. It's always been like that!" But the thing is, "at least, if other book-to-movie sequels lacked parts, the main point was there," something in contrast. Good thing though, the flick has this 'bag of tricks.'

I have also red several movie reviews prior to making my own statement. And things turn out, they were right either. Well, let me reiterate that: 'PARTLY RIGHT.'

For the entire 80 minute-stretch, I think the book has a lot more to tell than the airtime allotted. It's true that the flick should earn that 'everything movie of the year' title (since neither recent-produced mainstream has achieved such).

But again, I can only tell two words: 'wasted potential.' 

Still... I would recommend this.

The verdict: 6.6

Author: slickmaster | (c) 2014 september twenty-eight productions

The Review: Lego Movie

2/22/2014 3:25:10 PM

Hmm, since I was a kid, LEGO used to be one of my ultimate favourite toys (aside from Matchbox and its Asian version, TOMICA, of course) But Lego was more popular than anyone else, unless you’re a girl and of course, Barbie used to be the hit for you female kids out there.

But, a building block toy, turned out to be a movie? Say, it’s like I’ve been waiting this for more than a decade and a half from my imagination. Or did anyone like saw this coming before?

Look, they got a video game thru playstation, and personal computer, and a Danish amusement park. So, who can deny this thing’s ascension to popularity?

Yes’ they’ve got a flick, they followed the likes of Barbie fairy tales, G.I. Joe action figures, Transformers, and I won’t be surprised if there’s any other similar matter who will follow the suit. Come on, let’s face it. That’s the trend we had.

But outside looking in, the movie did not do much the same level on its soundtrack. Maybe because it helped me think for too much, and too much is obviously, not good for anyone’s health. But anyway, the music is entertaining. Oh, yeah. Everything is awesome.

Perhaps they used multiple approaches when it comes on putting up this Lego movie, there’s ‘stuff animation’ (similar to puppet), there’s 3D-post production graphics, the typical one, and real live action stuff. Hmm, tough way to do the execution part, eh?

But maybe if there’s something I cannot understand on the shallow aspect, there are some findings on the deeper side of life: yes, everything is awesome. I mean, we are the master builders of our own respective lives. We may don’t have that LEGO brick to build everything literally, but every single time, we used to build something that seemed matter to us. Of course, I’m on a deep excavation mode yet again. We build our dreams, we build that into reality, and we’re living it if we’re fulfilled.

And also, the prophecy is just man-made. In other words, if we believed on it, it will just manipulate us. What I’m saying is that it’s all in our mind whether we are the one who will be destined to do something greatness or just destroy it and think other’s works is just a piece of crap.

Let’s face it. We can’t appreciate our own work if we think we are the ones who had done it. Let’s face it, every single one of us has this much capability to be at its best, and others way better than us. You know I’m saying? It’s like you brag to yourself “I’m the most handsome guy in the world, while in fact it’s very obvious someone is looking better than you are.” If we can only set aside our own insecurities and start appreciating the ones whom are appreciating you the most (does it sound complicated by the way?)

Nonetheless, it’s still entertaining as shit.

Yes, everything is really awesome. Damn!

Author: slickmaster | © 2014 september twenty-eight productions

The Review: The Wolf of Wall Street

2/1/2014 10:16:14 AM

I used to wonder before about this movie’s screenplay as I have seen its trailer, plus the awards they garnered at the Academy Awards. And it seems that really convinced me to watch the flick entitled “The Wolf of Wall Street.”

That time though it’s like these ‘desperate measures’ are haunting me as TWOWS was only available to the Metropolitan’s selected cinemas, especially with the advent of 47 Ronin, Bride for Rent, and some surviving MMFF entries routing the movie houses to make sales.

Wait a second. What the hell is this ‘wolf of wall street?’

A movie based on Jordan Belfort’s true accounts, with Terence Winter doing the translation from page to screen, and Martin Scorsese’s masterpiece in both direction and producing aspects, with the latter division includes Riza Aziz, Joey McFarland, Emma Tilingger Koskoff, and the actor himself Leonardo DiCaprio.

Yes, true story about Belfort luring a working chore in the stockbroker industry, and how we went richer and even beyond his’ and anyone’s expectations.

How money played his mind, take over his life in totality, how he made other people believe that like him… they can be successful in the same line, how drugs can be good until it is abused, and everything has a price to pay.

Plus, the fact that the word that spells f-u-c-k has been pronounced for numerous times (so numerous you can’t even list that on your calendar sheets) regardless if it past tense (fucked), present (fucking, fucks) or even future (will fuck, shall fuck).

Well, I could have said “fuck this movie” for that matter though.

Well, this movie seemed to have a resemblance of reality bites in present. Let’s face it. Some businesses around the world used to do the same business as Belfort’s, and they are really rolling calling for the sake of earning in the expense of somebody else’s stocks… well, unless if it’s legal.

Is this thing called comedy? Maybe, on their (moviemaker’s) part; but I’ll call it the serious one. I mean, yeah, serious comedy. Cause you don’t see many comical moments on most parts of the movie. It’s like you can count on your fingers how many times you have laughed on this flick. The upside though is that those were also the times they had done an exceptional good job.

The only problem we got here though is some scenes on their R-16 version really suck. The cut was obviously made, as if it was rushed in editing chores. And as a watcher who can be more critical when it comes to the technicalities of camera and digital usage (well, just sometimes), it sucks. Or on the other side, could it be the movie house suffered some flaws in their player considering that TWOWS is the first movie to be distributed in digitalized form. Hmmm…

Well, I can’t say anything about DiCaprio. No wonder why he got the best actor, plus earning $10 million for this. The others did well on their acting as well. Though I wonder, in 185 minutes of playtime, have I really seen enough? It may be quite too long for a typical movie which only ruins for mostly 90-120 minutes, but seriously, the near-ending part seems to screw me up. Or maybe that made me think how on earth did he managed to get out of prison and talk on sales technique yet again since before the last sequence, it seems that he still rolls on prison?

Nah, maybe I should read the shit soon. Fucking good flick, eh?

The verdict: 8.3

Author: slickmaster | © 2014 september twenty-eight productions