Elysium

Elysium focused too much on the heavy-handed theme and not enough on the actual story elements. It wasn't exciting, believable, or worth watching. 

The trailer for Elysium didn't sell me on it, and neither did Roeper's review, even though he gave it an A-, which is pretty high. It's from the same guy who directed District 9. He really needs to lay off the heavy-handed themes. He's not changing the world with these movies. He's from South Africa, though, so I guess that explains where he gets it.

Hara-Kiri: Death of a Samurai

Miike's Hara-Kiri is beautifully directed, but it's also depressing, boring in parts, and not terribly original. 

I'm having a problem finding movies I'm interested in. I was watching the trailer for Blitz seeing if I could get into it enough to watch it, and I felt like I wanted to see something with swords. I had Hara-Kiri on my list of movies to watch, so I watched the trailer for that. I wasn't exactly sold, but I decided to go with it anyway. I wanted something with a little substance, even if I was running the risk of being bored.

Apparently, according to IMDb, the original was better. I didn't even know there was an original. I found out about the remake when I was looking through Ignatiy Vishnevetsky's reviews. He liked it, and I've always been interested in Miike's stuff. 13 Assassins was good, although everything before that was pretty crazy. I can't even believe I watched that stuff anymore. Supposedly the original draws you in more, and there's more dialogue between the father and the clan guy.

That would've been good, because my suspicions were right: I got bored, especially in the middle. I really lost interested when they took the focus away from the present-day stuff and started talking about how Hanshirô knew Motome. The cinematography was great, though. I loved the camerawork and the sets. It really was beautifully directed. I don't know why Miike shot it in 3D. That probably didn't add much, although it would've been a good effect with the falling snow. 

I liked the slow, deliberate pacing of the camera and people's movements, and the fact that we saw what happened to Motome and then afterward learned why it happened made it more interesting.

In Time

In Time's concept and world are cool, but they're wasted on a lackluster plot and Justin Timberlake's bad acting.

I was interested in this movie when it came out, and I remembered it had gotten semi-favorable buzz. I couldn't think of anything else I wanted to see this weekend. I think it would've been a better movie without Justin Timberlake. I looked over Ebert's review after I watched it, and he thought Justin was great, but I'm not with him on that. His acting was terrible; it pulled me out of the movie practically every time he said something.

It's totally engaging just because of the concept, but plot is a letdown. They could've done a lot more with it. It was cool seeing people like Pete from Mad Men, Cillian Murphy, and Matt Bomer. They all really helped carry the movie. There shouldn't have been so many "time" puns. It got ridiculous.