|
|
Dorian's Movie Reviews
Is it worth seeing? Reviews are presented with no cynicism, no comparisons, no biased standards, no pretentiousness - every movie is reviewed on its individual entertainment value including technical presentation.
Scale 1 - 5 |
Rated R |
Covering the development of the Western US in 1861 through the stories of individuals, the scope of this movie is huge but entertaining and full of beautiful cinematography. People who are accustomed to more focus and straightforward plots may find the scope a bit of a problem.
Some mistakes are devastating. One is building where indigenous people don't want you to build. Some wound your production, such as introducing too many characters, introducing too many storylines, and not having a plot to follow. This was more thematically driven, although the characters and situations were compelling.
Why would I be harsh about a good movie? Costner is capable of much better. The rating could have been an 8 or a 9 of 10, and the box office might have been better instead of questionable. It will likely cover its 100 million cost in cumulative and foreign distribution. Although right now, people are starved for good entertainment and may recall Kevin Costner's previous western, Dances With Wolves. Some people walked out of the three hour movie asking, "What the hell was that?"
I explained to some that Costner was setting up the saga, introducing characters and plots that would be in part 2 of the saga. I get it. Some didn't. The heat exhausts us and our minds. The movies should have been named Horizons: origins.
The movie lost me once when it abruptly changed to a different story line.
Costner knows character, storytelling, and cinematography. When I worked with Writers Workshop in L.A., he was a contributor. Appreciated and not forgotten. With three projects currently in development, he could do much better.
Characterization: The characters stood out. Each one was well crafted, motivated, most were individually recognizable, and had compelling characteristics and storylines. The only fault I find is that there were too many of them to keep track of. Some of the bad guys became indistinguishable from other characters until they went into action. I'll give it a 5 out of 5.
Setting: The settings were beautiful and looked authentic to the period. I'll give it a 5 out of 5.
Plot or storyline: I would have opted for more focus on fewer characters to create enough dramatic tension to make people want to come back for the next episode in the saga. I'll give it a 4 out of 5.
Cinematography: It caught my attention when the camera telegraphed to us through camera movement that someone at the old church was watching. I wish newer cinematographers were better with technique. Overall I thought the cinematography was excellent. I'll give it a 5 out of 5.
Wardrobe, makeup: Looked authentic to the period. I'll give it a 5 out of 5.
Writing: The story wandered too much from character storyline to storyline. I teach writers to focus. Focus has much more power than other writing techniques, and this is an example.
The writing for dramatic action was generally excellent but a little predictable. Audiences love what is unique and unpredictable. I'll give it a 4 out of 5.
Directing: I didn't see any directing problems other than the need to work harder on putting a storyline with internal integrity together. I also didn't see how the early scenes at the destroyed church moved the story forward. 4 of 5.
Editing: One cut to an entirely new storyline was too abrupt and needed some foreshadowing. Maybe not possible with the dailies. 4.5 of 5.
Acting: Would single out performances, but there were too many good ones. Performances by Costner, Sienna Miller, Abbey Lee, Owen Crow Shoe, were standouts in a room of richly portrayed characters by all. Memorable scenes. Excellent. 5 of 5.
Production design: Wow! Very authentic. The army tents could have been dirtier and looked more used. :) 5 of 5.
I give this one four spotlights out of a possible five for the writing, acting, directing, production design, casting, editing, music, cinematography, and entertainment value. Grab a bag of popcorn and see it. Enjoy!
- Dorian
Scale:
- 5 Spotlights: The best of movie making, well worth seeing (rarely given)
- 4 Spotlights: Good movie for the genre; may have minor technical or story problems but they hardly harm the enjoyment; clearly worth seeing; (most movies)
- 3 Spotlights: Not bad, but has problems - worth seeing
- 2 Spotlights: Caution - a "B" movie, probably will appeal only to some
- 1 Spotlight: Caution - not recommended for any audience (will probably never be given)
Note: No half spotlights are given.
My reviews are not based much on my personal taste, or any standard besides entertainment value. I try to be as objective as possible, keeping in mind that entertainment value is very subjective and individualized. If I'm not interested in a movie I usually don't go see it, so it doesn't get reviewed. Each character, and each position in the production company might be highlighted if the contribution affected the enjoyment of the story as either outstanding or dismal and I noticed it, keeping in mind that many contributions are singularly distinguished by their seamless integration with the story, not calling attention to themselves and thereby escaping attention.
- Dorian Scott Cole. Author page: Dorianscottcole.com
Inevitable Legal Disclaimer: The views expressed on this page are only opinions and should be regarded as opinions by the reader.
Other distribution restrictions: None