The Ghost mountaineer - Must alpinist

English (Peaks eesti filmile ikka mingi hetk eesti keelse arvustuse ka tegema/I should do Estonian at one point as it's an Estonian film)

Estonian films have really gone a long way in the recent years - whereas in my teen years every Estonian film was a drama about drugs, sex, violence and spoiled youth mixed in with every kind of swear words imaginable now we are beginning to have interesting captivating stories that aren't all the same and there is even a variety of different genres! Truth to be told - Estonian films weren't always bad, quite the opposite, there are some pretty cool and solid films made before I was born, but somehow there was a serious downfall when I was young.

This was the first time I've seen an Estomian horror film before and I loved this one! I've voiced it before how I always seem to care more for those stories that are based off real life and what's scarier than a horror film based on real life events? Some foreign critics have claimed that this movie is kind of stuck between genres - not quite horror, but not quite thriller or mystery either. I would argue that real life is never of one genre and that only adds believability to the whole plot. I think the mixing of genres made the film more layered and interesting. The dream sequences were cool and added that element of horror while the fact that they were just dreams meant that the whole thing was still believable. It was a great movie with some of the horror added by the realization of  how scary the Soviet times really could be once you accidentally got in the way of authority. There was constant suspense and thrill.

I also feel the need to voice my stance about whether Priit Pius looks more like Benedict Cumberbatch or Matt Damon. Seeing as that has become a real question with the help of foreign critics. I'm not sure about Matt Damon, but from certain angles he does indeed look like Benedict a bit. Well decide for yourself

Priit Pius

Benedict Cumberbatch

007: Spectre

I'm kind of embarrassed to write this, but I have never seen a Bond movie. There was a time when all of them where showing on an Estonian channel, once a week and I was pretty determined to check them out and I did start watching them, but I am not sure that I ever got all the way with any of them. Not because they were boring or unbearable to watch - they seemed okay, but something always came up. So now I decided to finally go ahead and see one - to be honest it was mostly because I found out Andrew Scott was in it.

But I did think I should maybe love it. I've always liked detectives, secret agents, that kind of thing. I know about Bond, I know the characters, I know some of the names of the movies, I know the tropes. I even know (and love) some of the soundtracks so obviously this wasn't some hugely unexpected experience for me even if I haven't seen any Bond films. In fact it was pretty much what I expected.

It was okay. I didn't hate it, didn't love it, didn't even really like it that much, for instance I liked Kingsman much better, but this left me with very little feeling and I began to wonder why and eventually came to a conclusion: Maybe I don't like spy movies, maybe I just like films about the sort of friendships these films have. Bond is a loner. Yes, he has a team - Q and M and Moneypenny, but they don't go on cases with him and in that particular movie at least he was kind of a jerk taking advantage of all of their friendships, just using them. Bringing a Sherlock Holmes parallel (cause I'm good at those) It's a bit like Sherlock with Mrs. Hudson and Lestrade, but without Watson. Every cool agent or any character I've liked always has at least one close friendship and yes - Bond has Bond girls, but I have a problem with them too. Those relationships are shallow. I get it. They are Bond girls, they are meant to fall into James's arms, but that doesn't make them any more realistic. I actually expected to like the Bond girl in this one, because she seemed to independent and not just about to fall into Bond's arms. Aaand then she did. Just. like. that. "What are we going to do now? Make out? Oh okay."  This is just how it went and honestly the whole romance just felt fake.

Things I did like - Q. He seemed like a cute underrated character. I also liked C. It was hard to see it as anything else than Moriarty in a Bond movie, but they I liked that too.

Hunger Games - The last part

I've always liked the Hunger Games films. Even before reading the books, but afterwards I always enjoyed the very accurate portrayal of the books. However going into this I had an unpleasant surprise - I no longer remembered that much of the books! Another un-pleasantry was the cinema's projector breaking, while the staff was very nice making sure it got working again I'm still pretty sure I missed a good 10 minutes somewhere.
From what I remembered it was perfectly accurate, from what I asked of friends it was too. I think I missed some of Katniss's inner thoughts from the book most from this. The ending in the movie had a completely different feel to it than the ending in the book for me, even if it was the exact same ending.

I loved the scenes with Peeta explaining the way his mind gets muddled and the others offering him a way to cope with the "true, not true" method. That felt believable. Peeta voicing his thoughts generally felt more believable than Katniss doing it. Maybe because Peeta is the sort of more emotional character from whom you might expected speaking about their emotions like that, with Katniss it just felt like they had no better way of narrating the inner thoughts in the book.

Which brings me to Gale - what the hell happened to Gale? He wasn't this bad in the books, was he? I felt like the only reason they made him kind of mean in the movie was because otherwise it would feel like Katniss was only settling for Peeta, but the thing is - for me it always felt like she did. So that felt like cheating.

Effie is my favorite character and it's always a bit of a shock that she does survive! I love her outfits above all, but I really missed the scene where she is captured for stealing bread. For one I think it was a great way to show that the District 13 was really not that much of a better place than the capitol and two - hey - it had Effie. That's a reason to have any scene.
Those were my thoughts.

Burnt

I like food films. I like series about food and I like watching movies about food and chefs and restaurants, but that also means I've seen a lot of them and that they get less and less surprising every time. As you know the element of surprise is a big thing for me, sometimes I think I should just stop expecting to be surprised so much. I liked this film, at least it wasn't about a family guy who was working too hard, not paying attention to his young adorable child. Although there was a woman doing that.  The main character had an interesting backstory. It had bits that surprising me, a couple that I really really liked even if I called most of the main plot. It was a good movie, not one that left an everlasting memory or an imprint to my mind, one I am likely to forget about soon, but still a pretty nice watching.

Black Mass

After all the papers here had long finished reviewing and critiquing this I discovered that the movie I've been wanting to see since April was showed here for the last time today. So I went to that very last screening and here is a slightly bias opinion. Technically, opinions are always biased, but I'm saying this, because you should know before hand I'm a huge fan of Benedict Cumberbatch and thus am automatically more likely to love anything with him in it.

But leaving him aside, is Johnny Depp a human camelion or what? He looks entirely different in every single movie as far as I am concerned. He and Benedict don't really look like brothers at all, but neither do my dad and his brother so I'll let that one go. As for Benedict I feel like they tried so hard to make him look ugly with the cheek implants(Yes. Apparently. Not sure how), but sorry - you still failed, along with the women of the film he was still the most beautiful person there and I liked his character too. He was a nice contrast to all the criminals, a politician with a normal-ish family life and 9 children. Sure, he was also involved, he was loyal to his brother who was pretty much the king of the criminal world, but there was still this nice contrast with him somehow. Also (spoiler ahead) I'm so glad he survived! I was so scared he'd be shot at one point or another.  

 
This is the sort of film that keeps you on the edge of your seat constantly. Everyone could die, at any point, when you know to expect it and when you won't expect it at all. And yet, somehow, incredibly, both of my favorite characters survived. My nerves are quite fragile and I jump at every gunshot that is unexpected or expected, but it was still a nice thrilling plot. I like the feeling.

It might be a bit unethical to say think about a movie that is based on real life events (and by the way I really like that about films like that. It's the only way they are worth a watch). but I find the criminal world really interesting, their honour code, their interactions, their twisted moral and logic. It's complicated, fascinating, it's what makes the movie so thrilling and compelling. It even....oddly makes you(me) feel for some of the character. Even if they really were as awful as they were.

The last witch hunter

I've re-read my last post on "Crimson Peak" and because I've read plenty of great thoughts on the movie I have to admit I don't think I really did the film justice. I still agree with everything I wrote, but I've read some interesting thoughts on Thomas's and Lucille's relationship and how they were rather pitiful in a way that I hadn't thought of. I can't say I still feel for Lucille in any way, but I do feel for Thomas. I hadn't thought of the way Lucille had manipulated him over the years. It's an interesting thing to consider...

Anyway I saw "The Last Witch Hunter" a while ago and while it was the kind of movie that I'd normally like: with magic and witches and all the supernatural stuff, it wasn't really anything too mind blowing for me. There were a couple of things that came as a positive surprise like the twist with the Dolan. It was entirely unexpected. Honestly, not having had seen anything of the movie besides the poster I sort of expected the film to be about the new friendship of Kaulder and Dolan the 37th( the one played by Elijah Wood) at first and I would have liked that since I really like Elijah Wood. But if there's anything I like in a Hollywood movie it is to be surprised and surprised I was. I also liked Chloe's character powers rather a lot and her style in general.

Now for the things I didn't like - the whole "character has lived for hundreds of years" topic is both really dangerous and really rewarding. It is really rewarding, because you can think about what that time would do to a human and it is dangerous, because we really don't know and therefore it can easily seem unrealistic. In this film, I don't think it was much thought about at all. The makers just seemed to think:"Hey, wouldn't it be cool if we made this character really really old? Yeah. It would. It seems cool and dramatic." But on the same time there's close to no consideration to what that does to a human mind. Or if there is it seems very unrealistic to me. Kaulder's whole character seems like there could be so much more to it, but the writers haven't bothered with him much.

My last big bone to pick with this movie is also the biggest spoiler - it's the ending. It seems like the writers were afraid to kill off the main character, because that is a big no-no in the world of Happily Ever After. But killing off Kaulder would have given the movie more of a point, it would have given it impact and meaning that now just went missing, because a random excuse was found to save the main guy.

Crimson Peak

I'm usually the one to roll my eyes when someone says they like a movie for it's visual side(meaning sceneries and costumes and not the camera work) . I think the visual is important, but if that's the only good thing about a movie you can find to say - it was a crappy movie. This wasn't a crappy movie, but I thoroughly enjoyed the visuals of this movie- the clothes, the surroundings, the scenery. It was stunning. I like a good horror movie and despite the fact that this was in fact a Gothic romance and not a horror movie as I originally foolishly thought it had some lovely horror elements. Overall it was very classy. It wasn't too scary, but thankfully not too gruesome or gross or - dull. It felt a bit fairy-tale-ish really. Some scenes reminded me of The Beauty and the Beast and Bluebeard. I wished the ending wouldn't be so fairy-tale-ishly cliche as well. It would have been a bit more interesting with some other ending I think? Maybe I'm too picky.
Also Tom Hiddestone can't ever do a fully evil character, can he? I actually like that, I like characters who aren't that one dimensional. I like layered characters.
(Edited on 26th of October: I was informed that the movie was not in fact Horror as I stated earlier, but a Gothic romance)