It was around 2001 that I first watched this film and recently giving it another go, ever since, doesn't change the fact for me that this movie is an timeless piece of filmaking. From the characters to the striking and thought-provoking story, it basically has everything to make an action film a 10/10 in a book.

Get this: what if all we know as reality was, in fact, virtual reality? Reality itself is a ravaged dystopia run by technocrat Artificial Intelligence where humankind vegetates in billions of gloop-filled tanks - mere battery packs for the machineworld - being fed this late '90s VR (known as The Matrix - you with us here?) through an ugly great cable stuck in the back of our heads. And what if there was a group of quasi-spiritual rebels infiltrating The Matrix with the sole purpose of crashing the ruddy great mainframe and rescuing humans from their unknown purgatory? And, hey, what if Keanu Reeves was their Messiah?
What sounds like some web freak's wet dream is, in fact, a dazzlingly nifty slice of sci-fi cool. The Wachowski Brothers (Andy and Larry - last seen dabbling in kinky lesbian noir with the excellent Bound) pulling off something like a million masterstrokes all at once. Taking the imprimatur of the video game, they meld the grungy noir of Blade Runner, the hyperkinetic energies of chopsocky, John Woo hardware and grandiose spiritual overtones into William Gibson's cyberpunk ethos to produce a new aesthetic for the millennium powered to the thudding beat of techno. And it is just incredible fun. The key is the technique of "flo-mo", a process born from Japanese animation, whereby an object in motion is seemingly frozen while the camera miraculously spins around it as if time and gravity are on hold. It grants the action (including some killer kung fu which Reeves and crew spent months perfecting) liberty to take on surreal visual highs. Superhuman feats permissible, of course, in the context of VR as the rebels download Herculean "talents" to fuel their subterfuge. Meanwhile, the audience can only gawp longingly, with its jaws thunking to the cinema floor in unison, as the heroes wrapped in skintight leather, sleek shades and designer cheekbones, spin up walls, leap from high rises and slip through streams of bullets in silken slo-mo. Tron this ain't.
Immediately reigniting the moribund cyberpunk genre (the kids can't get enough Stateside), this has thrust Reeves from his imploding career back to Speed highs (and laying to rest the hideous ghost of Johnny Mnemonic) and stolen much more of Star Wars' thunder than was thought humanly possible. For all its loony plot, The Matrix is fabulous.
Sure, the expert Fishburne is depended upon to expound the lion's share of the script as seer-like rebel leader Morpheus. Reeves, stunning in his newcast slenderness, as Thomas "Neo" Anderson, the hacker turned hope for all mankind (care of some ill-defined mystical calling) is asked little more than perpetual befuddlement. Like Speed, though, this movie plays on his iconic looks rather than his oak-like emoting. There's a major find, too, in the irresistible Carrie-Anne Moss, a majestically wrought combination of steely no-shit intelligence and rock-chick vivaciousness as fellow tripper Trinity. And Weaving, cast against type, neutralises his Aussie tones to a freaky deadpan, the head of the MiB-styled defence system set against the Goth invaders.
And sure, three minutes of post-movie deliberation and all this state-of-the-art cyberdevilry is reduced to the purest gobbledygook. That, though, is not the point. The Matrix is about pure experience; it's been many a moon since the Empire crew have spilled out of a cinema literally buzzing with the sensation of a movie, babbling frenetically with the sheer excitement of discovery.
From head to tail, the deliciously inventive Wachowskis (watch them skyrocket) have delivered the syntax for a new kind of movie: technically mind-blowing, style merged perfectly with content and just so damn cool, the usher will have to drag you kicking and screaming back into reality. You can bet your bottom dollar George never saw this phantom menace coming.
Verdict - The deliciously inventive Wachowskis have delivered the syntax for a new kind of movie: technically mind-blowing, style merged perfectly with content and just so damn cool.
5/5
- Ian Nathan, Empire Magazine

The Martix is a great example of a movie that will live for ever or a very log time. The story and concept are out of this world. Keanu Reeves plays his role with utter brilliance, the cast was very well put together and the graphics are still to this day amazing. All in all one of the best movies of all time.

Mandingo. D'Artagnan. Slave abuse. Tarantino's technique of capturing the painful discrimination against blacks head-on and, on the contrary, making it cathartic in the final scene is brilliant. Starting with the impressive theme song, nonstop violence replaces it, giving us a glimpse into the kaleidoscope of horrific American society. Leonardo DiCaprio's monstrous performance and Christoph Waltz's near-perfect supporting turn are the main reasons for the film's appeal, but Quentin Tarantino's screenplay, which deliberately intersects revenge and black racism and ends up making us sneer at those who looked down on the slaves, is nothing short of brilliant.
Next to "Pulp Fiction" this is Quentin's best film.

Django Unchained entertained me, for sure, with its taut storyline and its lack of predictability, but it doesn’t rise to the level of my few favorite Tarantino efforts.
The trademark violence is present, sometimes to the point of it being cartoonish to me. It would have been easy to present many of the characters as stereotypical, but the script avoided that. The DiCaprio slave owner is vicious and cruel, but there are flashes of flexibility concerning the status quo with his slaves. And his elderly house slave seems to act more like a slave owner than he does.
A chemistry develops between the two lead characters as they work as bounty hunters, and that is satisfying to see. There are the usual sometimes subtle nods to other films, and I felt the influence of Spaghetti Westerns here and there.
As I said, I enjoyed the film, even though I won’t be watching it multiple times as I do with other Tarantino movies. If you have the stomach for violence and portrayed extreme And presumably historically accurate racism, give it a look.

When Django is unchained (pronounced JANG-oh, not Duh-JANG-oh)
Released in 2012 and directed & written by Quentin Tarantino, "Django Unchained" stars Christoph Waltz as an ex-dentist who befriends an ex-slave, Django (Jamie Foxx) in West Texas a couple of years before the Civil War; they team-up as bounty hunters once they realize how good they jell. The second half focuses on their attempt to infiltrate a Mississippi plantation owned by pompous Southerner "Monsieur" Candie (Leonardo DiCaprio) in order to rescue Django's wife (Kerry Washington). Samuel L. Jackson plays Candie's overly loyal house slave.
This is an excellent American Western with Spaghetti Western elements featuring Tarantino's typical artistic flourishes. It takes place in the West AND in the South, which is reminiscent of the underrated "Nevada Smith" (1966), one of my favorite Westerns. Waltz is magnetic as the nonchalant protagonist and he & Foxx have good chemistry. There's a nice mix of interesting dialogues, amusing moments and over-the-top action. Unfortunately, but to be expected, Tarantino goes overboard with the 'n' word and the blood-letting, the latter to the point of cartoonish-ness.
Nevertheless, this is an original Western that is vibrant with creativity, including stunning locations, cinematography and a great amalgamated soundtrack/score, which includes cuts by Ennio Morricone, like the excellent "Hornets' Nest," the imaginative "The Braying Mule" and the moving "Ancora Qui." It's all-around superior to "The Hateful Eight" (2015) because it's not limited by a one-room whodunit plot (although "Hateful" has its unique points of interest).
The movie runs 165 minutes and was shot in Jackson Hole, Wyoming; Evergreen Plantation & New Orleans, Louisiana; and several locations in California (Lone Pine, Alabama Hills, Semi Valley, Melody Ranch, Santa Clarita, Independence & Los Angeles). The cast includes numerous peripheral notables, e.g. Ato Essandohs, Don Stroud, James Remar, Bruce Dern, Ato Essandoh, Franco Nero, Don Johnson, Amber Tamblyn and several others.
GRADE: A

This is one of the best movies I have watched in a long time. It is a pure Tarantino blast. The somewhat unexpected and quite hilarious start of the movie catches your attention from the start and from then on it is 3 hours (almost) of pure enjoyment.
The main actors are playing their roles very well. The Dr. King Schultz character (Christop Walz) is incredibly funny without being ridiculous, Jamie Foxx is excellent as Django and Leonardo DiCaprio is doing his role well as a plantation owner and slave trader. None of the rest of the crew stood out as particularly bad. Well with the possible exception of Tarantino himself then when he made his usual in-movie appearance a’ la Hitchcock. Not that he was particularly bad but he is no actor either.
The movie starts of by Dr. Schulz liberating Django and proceeding to a small town showing Django what he is in the business of doing. Those first minutes of the movie are somewhat unexpected and very funny to watch. After that the movie gets more serious as Django gets to learn to be a bounty hunter and finally gets on with his quest to rescue his “Damsel in distress”. It still has quite a bit of “Tarantino humour” sprinkled around in it though.
During the movie we are treated to a long series of stereotypical people with, let us say, an “attitude” towards African people. It is tempting to say “nigger haters” but that would not be true since a lot of these people did not exactly hate them. They just did not consider African people to be people but more than live stock for them to use as they wished. Unlike a lot of movies portraying these events this one never comes across as boringly finger pointing or overly morally lecturing. Nor does it in any way support or glorify the way things were at this time. It is a movie made to entertain set in a period where bad shit happened and using it for the story. Nothing more and nothing less.
As usual with a Tarantino movie there are some violent parts, some more violent parts and some bloody violent parts in it. The ending fights are a glorious show of destruction and blood splatter. I am sure some people are complaining about the “unnecessary violence”. I am not one of those people. Without these parts it would not be a real Tarantino movie. As always it is made with the usual exaggeration that Tarantino is so good and which reminds you that it is “only a movie”.
This is one of the few movies that I have given 10 out of 10 stars in a very long time. I enjoyed it immensely.

**ENTERTAINING from start to finish !!**
Given I am a big fan of **Quentin's** works i knew this movie would be a treat to watch.But what i didn't know was violence can be so **COOL**... The movie is a treat to watch(including the blood and gore) from starting to end.The acting is superb.And the cinematography is just too good! The whole cast played their parts to perfection...Especially **Samuel L. Jackson** and **Jamie Foxx**..**Leo and Christopher Waltz** were superb too..And as Christopher said in the movie - "It was hard to RESIST".A must watch for everyone who likes QUALITY cinema..Even the ones who cant stand BOOMs and BANGs, you wouldn't regret spending about 3 hours watching this well written, well directed and well acted GREAT movie !!

A highly entertaining yet disturbing film with superb cast and performances for an audience who would likely never consider watching a film fundamentally about slavery, where Tarantino is masterfully and emphatically navigating and exposing the complex layers of the violent and dehumanizing system of slavery.

America, mid-nineteenth century, just prior to the Civil War. Winter. Two horsebacked slave-traders are leading half-a-dozen manacled negro slaves through a large, unspecified section of Texas. As they move one night through a wood, they cross paths with an affable, charming German fellow identified by the hokey model tooth affixed atop his carriage by a spring as a travelling dentist. He greets the traders cordially but he's struggling to be understood; not because English is his second language (although he deferentially concedes as much when instructed - more than once - to "Speak English!") but because his vocabulary is far wider than that of the simpler men here before him. It's not a chance passing, either; this German fellow, who identifies himself as Dr. King Schultz (played by Christoph Waltz with the same smiling, deadly menace that earned him an Oscar statue for his part as Col. Hans Landa in Inglourious Basterds) is looking for these traders. More specifically, their inventory of negro slaves. Even more specifically, one of those slaves in particular. Django (Jamie Foxx, Collateral, Ray). Attempting to buy Django, Schultz is met with short, suspicious shrift and ordered at gunpoint to be on his way. Within a second, one trader lies dead and the other lies incapacitated underneath the bulk of his dead horse. Schultz unchains Django, instructs Django to take the dead fellow's horse and coat, and pays the remaining trader for all that he's taken. He then tosses the manacle key to the other slaves and posits two choices to them, as he sees it: Carry their injured master thirty-plus miles to the nearest town for medical assistance, or unchain themselves, blow the injured slave-trader's head off with the gun Shultz has left them, bury the corpses and use the Pole Star to run for the Northern states, where slavery had been abolished, and for more than fifty years in some areas. Funnily enough, they take up the latter option.
So begins Django Unchained, an oater set in the slave states of the Deep South and the latest rollercoaster by Gen-X movieland wunderkind Quentin Tarantino. Always clearly a man heavily informed by the grindhouse subgenre of the Spaghetti Western, he's finally made one himself, and if Quentin's your thing it's a blast, though I doubt it'll convert many Tarantino sceptics; in fact it'll almost certainly reinforce those things that people dislike about him, about which more later.
It transpires that Dr. Schultz ISN'T a dentist ("I haven't practised dentistry in five years," he confides to Django over a beer) but a bounty hunter, and a lethal one at that. He's chasing down the Brittles, a murderous gang of brothers currently plying their trades as plantation overseers. He doesn't know what they look like but he knows they were recently employed at the Carrucan plantation, which is why he was searching for Django - a slave recently sold by that very plantation - in the first place; Django can point them out for him. Schultz is no fan of the South's backwards-thinking propensity for slavery though, and he offers Django a deal: help Schultz find and kill the Brittle Brothers, Schultz will treat Django like a free man, pay him $75 (a decent little wedge in 1858) and rubber-stamp his freedom. Along the way, he'll also teach Django a thing or two about the art of gunfighting and about the macabre trade of bounty-hunting (both in which Django proves to be a natural). On the trail of the Brittles, Schultz wonders aloud as to Django's plans once this endeavour is over and he's free. Well, as it happens, Django is a married man and his intention, once free, is to find his wife and buy her freedom. They'd tried to run from the Carrucan plantation together but they'd been caught, branded (both Django and his wife - played with all of her nerves exposed by Kerry Washington - sport R-For-Runaway scars on their cheeks) and sold on, separately. So he doesn't know where she is but that's what he's going to try to do. Schultz, feeling responsible for Django as the man granting him his freedom, proposes a further deal: If this Brittle bounty goes well, he'll honour Django's freedom but if Django stays with him through the winter as partners, taking on bounties and earning money, he'll help Django locate his wife.
What we have here is a large sequence of set-pieces - some funny, some tense, some action-packed - stretched across very-nearly three hours (though, like most QT films, it moves like a bullet train and those three hours just fly) strung together by a fairly simple revenge/rescue tale set against a geographically sprawling backdrop; a reasonably similar template to many of Quentin's movies and an almost identical template to that of previous outing Inglourious Basterds, to which Django Unchained could almost be considered a companion piece despite the wildly different global and historical settings. Like Inglourious Basterds, Django Unchained is quite a bit longer than the story need be, and like Inglourious Basterds that is because each scene is treated by Tarantino as a mini movie, a contained set-piece all of its own. Every scene is fleshed out and deepened for either heightened comic or dramatic effect by lengthened sequences of characters going about the mundane or by characters delivering enormous monologues - rambling shaggy-dog stories, usually - to one another, for context. Not every scene is entirely necessary, either. I wouldn't call that a flaw though, I'd call it a trait typical of Quentin Tarantino; whether it's a flaw or an outright treat depends entirely on whether that's an element of Tarantino's writing that the viewer appreciates. Personally, I love Tarantino's writer's voice and I could watch these scenes for hours (indeed, I watched Django Unchained three times over the course of yesterday), but I can fully undersand what those lamenting the decent 90-minute film that's lost somewhere within the sojourns and speeches of Django Unchained are saying.
Performances throughout are utterly mesmerising, from stars Foxx and Waltz but also - in fact, maybe more so - from principle antagonists Leonardo DiCaprio as "Monsieur" Calvin Candie, the horrifying owner of the "Candyland" plantation currently holding the ownership deeds on Django's wife, and Samuel L. Jackson in an if-anything even more monstrous role as Stephen, Candie's elderly head house slave, a man who has utterly abndoned the culture and torment of his people in return for a few material trappings as the slave-in-chief. Playing to superb comedic effect is Don Johnson as Big Daddy, a strutting, peacock-like Tennessee dandy and owner of the plantation currently employing the Brittle Brothers, and delightful in cameo roles are (among many others) James Remar (The Warriors, Dexter), Jonah Hill (Superbad, The Watch), John Jarratt (Wolf Creek, Rogue) and Michael Parks (Red State, Kill Bill). Quentin himself makes a cameo as usual and, as usual, he's not as charming as he probably thinks he is, but he's also not as bad as many think he is, either. There's even a quick cameo (raising an involuntary cheer from me!) by Franco Nero, the original Django from the magnificent 1966 film of the same name by Sergio Corbucci (that's not the only nod back to the first Django movie; the opening credits to Django Unchained are presented in exactly the same way as the original, and the theme song to Quentin's film comes directly from the Corbucci film too).
Django Unchained is likely to come under fire on a couple of counts; possibly for it's incredible levels of bloodshed (one particular gunfight is the most blood-splattered scene I've seen in a movie since those elevator doors opened in The Shining), and much more probably for the liberal use of what guilty white folks like to refer to as "The 'N'-word", uttered literally hundreds of times from first scene to last. However, neither criticism is warranted in my humble opinion. The bloodshed is of the overexaggerated cartoon quality. Heads, arteries and extremities explode upon bullet impact like detonated watermelons to a gloopy, "BLAAAPP!" sound effect, the blood itself translucent, syrupy and intentionally unrealistic. And if a tale is set against the backdrop of slavery in the 19th century deep South, you're going to hear the word "Nigger" in that tale. Often. Be assured though that just as Inglourious Basterds was a revenge fantasy of the downtrodden Jewish war refugees over the stupidly evil Nazi Germans, this is a tale of empowerment of the enslaved black man over his sadistic, pig-ignorant white overseers.
If you like Tarantino, you'll probably like Django Unchained. If you like Westerns (and the blood-drenched Spaghetti Westerns of the late sixties in particular), you'll probably like Django Unchained. If, like me, you're an admirer of both Tarantino AND westerns, this is a no-brainer. Get and see it, it's a blast.
I'd like to have seen him pull a Gatling gun out of a coffin, though.

Having inherited his father's skill, "Tony Stark" is supplying just about every bit of military hardware to the US Government. On a trip to Afghanistan, however, his convoy is ambushed and he is seriously injured. He awakens in a cave, held hostage by insurgents, and with the help of co-captive "Yinsen" (Shaun Toub) must use all of his skills to stay alive and to find a way out of his predicament. Cannibalising just about every bit of kit he can find, he concocts a power source to keep him alive and a suit of armour that enables him to fight his way out. Once free, he determines to further hone this flying suit of armour and use it for the common good. His business partner "Vanko" (Jeff Bridges) soon realises there are other, more lucrative, uses and a conspiracy is soon afoot. Can "Stark" thwart him and save the day? As ever, there is no jeopardy whatsoever - what this is, is a fun action adventure with loads of top notch visual effects and quite a bit of humour in a script well delivered by an on-form Downey well supported by Gwyneth Paltrow and a solid cast. The "Iron Man" stories are not the most complex. It's a pretty linear depiction of good and evil - though it does, at the start, demonstrate some of the ironies of the weapons supplies industry. It's overly long, we spend just a bit too much time getting going, but once it does - it is worth a watch on a big screen.

An ok movie. I just wish there was more action. The storyline was great but could have been a lot better with more action.

**Iron Man had all the class, quirks, genius, and fun to birth one of the greatest film franchises in cinematic history.**
The movie that started it all. That created the personality of a multi-billion dollar entertainment behemoth. That introduced the world to the first of many characters that have become household names and cultural icons. Iron Man stormed on the screen with a lead actor that Hollywood had given up on and a small start-up studio without a single movie under its belt backed by Disney, who had little to no live-action comic experience of their own. But director Jon Favreau’s adlibbed approach leveraged the strengths of his cast and created a world that was simultaneously realistic and magical - where a man could build a flying suit of armor, or a Thunder god could fall in love with a quirky mortal. Many forget that Robert Downey Jr’s personal struggles had left him blacklisted by many in Hollywood, making his casting a risky stroke of brilliance. The result of all this was precisely the lightning in a bottle needed to birth the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

**An excellent film, which only loses a little in some details related to the writing of the script and the conception of some characters.**
I'm not a fan of superhero movies, but like any movie fan in general, I've seen a good handful of them. This was the first film made by Marvel and financed by the company itself, and it brings us one of its most acclaimed heroes. The film shows how a young playboy millionaire named Tony Stark, with a fortune inherited from his father and largely made from the production and sale of weapons, becomes a vigilante determined not to allow the misuse of the weapons he sells. I don't know much about comics, but I believe that the film was limited to adapting to the cinema a story already written on paper about the origins of the character, giving it, perhaps, a touch of the present.
The plot is one of the strongest points of the film, not only for the way it introduces the character in the context of the current geopolitical conflicts (with the Middle East issue very present), but mainly for the way it transforms Tony Stark into a deeper character, who lives a catharsis that opens his conscience to questions that he was not sensitive enough to understand. Put more simply, if initially Stark was a rich and spoiled idiot, he ends the movie with another awareness of what he should do and how his attitudes influence the world around him. However, I also felt that once Stark realizes what he has to do, and it becomes clear who the enemy is to defeat, the script quickly loses quality and becomes much more basic and underdeveloped.
With a skillful direction provided by Jon Favreau, the cast gave us a very good performance. Of course, the public's attention is focused on Robert Downey Jr., an actor who started working in the 80s, but only began to emerge at the turn of the millennium, with some productions (*Gothika*, *Good Night and Good Luck*, *Zodiac*) that he entered before accepting Marvel's proposal. He is perfect in character and gives us his life's work as an actor. Beside him, we can still admire Gwynneth Paltrow, in a more discreet but competent role. The villain was secured by Jeff Bridges, but his work is not so well executed and the actor sometimes doesn't seem to know exactly how to behave in the character.
What can we say about the production values and technical quality of a movie with a millionaire budget of 140 million dollars? It is a film determined to be a blockbuster, which fully achieved all its objectives, earning high profits, pleasing the fans and achieving high praise from the general public and the specialized critics. And the money invested is in plain sight, with a declared bet on very high quality CGI, wonderfully well-executed sound and image effects and really good sets and costumes (with great emphasis - obviously - on Iron Man's suit and Stark's mansion). The cinematography is excellent, the filming work was really well done, and the editing was detailed, giving the film a pleasant rhythm that doesn't tire us out. Finally, a note of praise for the excellent and epic soundtrack.

My first taste of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. A great start!
I absolutely enjoyed seeing 'Iron Man'. Robert Downey Jr. is terrific as the titular character, who is a blast to watch throughout - love the design! The plot is very entertaining, I like how it tells the story; simply, but very effectively. Terrence Howard, Jeff Bridges and Gwyneth Paltrow, meanwhile, all add to the film with good performances.
The special effects are very neat, as are all the action sequences. I will say the score isn't the strongest, at least in terms of what I'd expect from this sorta film. I wouldn't say it's bad per se, just not as spectacular as it could've (should've?) been; especially with someone like Ramin Djawadi composing. I love a film with great music, so hopefully that improves as I watch the MCU expand.
I know, I'm extremely late to this particularly party but happy to finally begin watching.

When director Jon Favreau and Sarah Halley cast Robert Downey Jr, they glimpsed something magnificent: a more-than-skilled actor who faultlessly portrayed the role of Tony Stark. Despite Favreau's initial decision in choosing a fresh face, he ended up delighted due to his charismatic, natural and comfortable attitude. He did not realise it yet, but he was moulding with the right measures a whole superhero cinematic universe which lasted until today and still goes for more.
The filmmakers took the proper time to introduce a character whose production was undecided since New Line Pictures argued that the main character [Iron Man] had no potential to be brought up to the theatres. Therefore, planning from scratch a prosperous superhero who was not related to the typical Fantastic Four, X-Men or Spider-Man [famous superhero films of the 2000s] was quite a challenge. However, the director unquestionably demonstrated his skills at the visual effects, the rock metal music, the accurate dialogues for each moment and finally, the remarkable development of each persona. How exactly?
Establishing the visual effects of a high-speed-altitude enthusiast was marvellous, considering the time of the creation. The way Favreau adjusted the Iron Man gave numerous innovative perspectives of a superhero while in battle. If we first watched the 'Spidey Sense', then it was time to behold the flying upper and upper. What an achievement ladies and gentleman! Taking into account the sound effect, it was splendid in every single way because it gave decent time to evoke emotions, from sadness to awesomeness, it permitted to feel the sensation of building a strong armour or flying as fast as possible.
Man! That AC/DC hard rock music was well-defined to this fascinating character. Did I mention that Downey's son is growing on music? He has a band, and it's called "The Dose Band". Just watch the School of Rock's report. Probably there is where the influence came by. On the other hand, this film gives such iconic quotes which will live on our memory: "Is it better to be feared or respected?", "Sometimes you gotta run before you can walk", "I am Iron Man". WOW! What potential we have got here! Finally, but not least, the impeccable action scenes and drama ones were the highest achieves Iron Man had got. The sequence in the cavern traped with Dr Yinsen serves to the protagonist time to reflect on himself and the responsibility he has in protecting the world against high-tech diseases.
Plus, the very unusual but gorgeous chemistry between Tony Stark and his secretary/companion Pepper Potts is another striking feature which is not considered at all was. When Kevin Feige, the current president of Marvel Studios, was asked about his desition about casting Gwyneth Paltrow he confessed the following: "Gwyneth is the embodiment of a leading lady. She brings intelligence, poise and an incredible range of talent to this role". Throughout the movie, these two characters happened to be facing their professional and sentimental relationship naturally owing to the Iron Man. The way Pepper Potts clings on to the fact that his beloved boss is in troublesome scenarios, it's just pure tenderness and shows how much potential this couple has.
The cast assuredly introduced not only convincing performances but strong characters which will be handy for the following Marvel instalments, just watching Jeff Bridges as the badass Iron Monger is superb! The film producer nailed it! If someone asked me about the flaws it has presented, probably I would say the dark tone, some petit explicit scenes (bearing in mind there are children as spectators) and the lack of sense of humour at times. Still, it is mostly pure perfection.
[83/100]

Iron Man did a lot more than just launch the Marvel Cinematic Universe. It was the first comic book movie in a long time to integrate the fantastical nature of superheroes and supervillains into a real world setting with consequences. It also showed how great of a filmmaker Jon Favreau is and rebooted the career of Robert Downey Jr.
For all this, Iron Man is a fantastic movie, still one of the best MCU films. It's so much fun to watch. Yet it displays a lot of intelligence, exploring the internal dilemma of a man profiteering off war when faced with the harsh reality that he is part of a system that corrupts absolutely.

**A long form review originally posted in 2010:**
Marking the beginning of the latest Marvel franchise, _The Avengers_, is Jon Favreau's _Iron Man_.
I'm quite fond of Super Hero movies, I don't love them to the same extent that I do the slasher or psychological thriller genres, but they do hold a small place in my heart all to themselves. I'm pretty pumped for this whole "Avengers" thing to come to fruition, 'cause honestly it's all been great so far, starting with Iron Man, whom Robert Downey Jr. (_Natural Born Killers, Gothika, Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, A Scanner Darkly, Zodiac, Sherlock Holmes, Due Date_) portrays, and incredibly so.
It's important to set yourself a starting point. More specifically, what I mean is, a reason. Batman's parents were murdered, and his home was destroyedby crime; The Punisher's whole family was murdered in front of him and he big-time snapped; characters like the X-Men and the Fantastic 4 are defending themselves and end up having a penchant for world-saving. Those are all fine, and so long as you have one, I'm happy. But I really kind of like Tony Stark's reason for becoming Iron Man... He's a dick. That's why. He's a dick that supplies the world with the most lethal weapons in existence, and they take lives left, right and centre. Then, he's put through the world where they get used, and finally is told by the person who helped him escape that world, not to waste his life. He believes he is still alive for a reason, he decides that reason is to become a dick that is intent on privatising world peace. Which I think makes perfect sense.
That may have come across as sarcasm, but I was deadly serious. Tony Stark becomes Iron man, and that's why. It works fantastically. We then get to see all the incarnations of his suit, how difficult it was to make, what it runs on, the technology, everything. And I'm a huge fan of back story, which Iron Man delivers.
It's sort of the antithesis of DC's _Batman Begins_. Though they're both young adults that come from money with no family, a British butler (although Iron man's butler Jarvis was transformed into AI for the film [he was an actual person in the comics]), they have a board of directors take care of their family's billionaire business until they're ready to eventually take the reins, they both become "____ Man" and go about saving the innocent, not through superpowers but technology. I'm sure I could go on. But they're also incredibly different. Where Batman is a total bad ass, the gothic unknown defender of the night that uses fear as a weapon to protect his home town, and yet refuses to kill; Iron Man is a bright, shiny, loud attention grabber, who goes all international to fight crime, he wants the world to know he's Iron Man and his enemies are totally lame, so no wonder he has no qualms about killing! Batman's secret identity, Bruce Wayne, is an angsty tosser, that tries way to hard. But Tony Stark, is a witty, brilliant inventor, who has basically harnessed all of Batman's training, strength, weapons, vehicles and flight, improved them, and put them in to a single suit. So though I personally prefer Batman as a hero, I prefer Tony Stark as a character.
The interaction between Stark and Pepper Potts, played by Gwyneth Paltrow (_Se7en, The Talented Mr. Ripley, The Royal Tenenbaums, Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow_) was incredible. It just goes to show what good casting can achieve, even in an action flick, the dialogue is hilarious and clever. Is it possible for a Super Hero movie to be a bad Super Hero film but a great film? I guess it is.
The antagonists are lacking to say the least, and their dispatching leaves even more to be desired. Which is normally not too huge when you get the rest so perfect, unfortunately, it's a comic book film, about Super Heroes, and Super Villains. They fight one another over and over, in fact that's pretty much what the comics are about in their entirety, so it's quite a major short coming. That being said, it's really the only one that _Iron Man_ has. In a way though, they're a similar comparison to the latest Batman films again; Iron Monger and Whiplash are flashy, but disappointing, where The Joker, Two-Face, Scarecrow and Ra's al Ghul are top notch as bad guys. Whereas Ironman's Obadiah Stane and Ivan Vanko were great characters, but Batman's The Joker is only seen in his villain persona, and Harvey Dent, Jonathan Crane and Henri Ducard are nothing more than vessels for their alter-egos.
All that aside, the film is just plain good, and you don't need to be a fan of Iron Man, Super Heroes or comics in general to enjoy _Iron Man_.
82%
-Gimly

Imaginative illustration of an epic story. It combines the modern background society, e.g. terrorism, with the unconventional high-tech fantasy. Our leading actor Robert Downey Jr. deeply embodies the soul of the Iron Man in himself. We common people never lived this way :P

The Shawshank Redemption is one of those timeless classics that pulls you in with its heartfelt storytelling and remarkable performances. At its core, it’s a story about hope, friendship, and the resilience of the human spirit, set against the bleak backdrop of Shawshank prison. Tim Robbins as Andy Dufresne and Morgan Freeman as Red deliver deeply moving performances, capturing the bond that grows between two men confined by walls but freed by hope. Every scene feels purposeful, and the script, adapted from Stephen King’s novella, is simply brilliant in how it weaves small moments into a powerful narrative.
One of the most unforgettable parts of the movie is Brooks’ storyline. Watching him leave the world he knew, only to find himself unable to adapt to a society that had progressed beyond his comprehension, is heartbreaking every time. It’s a stark reminder of how institutionalization can strip people of their ability to live freely, even after they've served their time. That moment, along with Red’s own journey, adds a bittersweet layer of realism to the story’s broader themes of freedom and redemption.
The direction by Frank Darabont is masterful, turning what could have been a straightforward prison drama into something deeply profound. The setting of Shawshank feels both oppressive and oddly serene, perfectly capturing the tone of the story. The simplicity of the plot is its strength, allowing the characters and their emotional arcs to take center stage. With its pitch-perfect pacing, poetic dialogue, and an uplifting finale, The Shawshank Redemption remains a film that resonates on every rewatch. It’s not just a movie; it’s an experience.

The Shawshank Redemption is a timeless masterpiece, blending powerful performances with a poignant narrative about hope and friendship. Tim Robbins and Morgan Freeman deliver unforgettable performances, creating a deeply emotional story of resilience and redemption. With its captivating plot and profound themes, it remains one of the greatest films ever made.

Simple, I would say, beauty in the art of cinematography and storytelling.

This movie is an absolute masterpiece, blending deep emotion and powerful storytelling. It follows the journey of a banker wrongfully imprisoned, whose enduring hope and resilience inspire everyone around him. His friendship with a fellow inmate is heartwarming and beautifully portrayed, capturing the essence of human connection. The film explores themes of redemption and the strength of the human spirit, leaving a lasting impact. With unforgettable performances and a story that resonates on so many levels, it’s a film that stays with you long after the credits roll. I can’t help but give it a 10/10.

Amazing movie

**Watched it 32 times**
Call me obsessed, but I have watched this movie 32 times (and counting) over the past 2 decades. One may wonder why? It is because every time I watch this movie, I learn something new from it. For example, despite being such a good friend of Red, Andy never shares his plan with him. This taught me that discipline and focus is vital for success.
I can not praise enough the tight plot, direction, acting and everything. On my favorite movies list, this one certainly tops the chart.

Tim Robbins is wealthy banker "Andy Dufresne" who finds himself sentenced to life imprisonment after his wife and her lover are found murdered. The handsome "new fish" is initially the target of the "sisters" who would use him as they would like - but he fights back and gradually establishes a friendship with prison "scrounger" Morgan Freeman ("Red"). When he overhears the beastly prison guard captain bemoaning some tax problems, he, rather riskily, volunteers to help find a tax-free solution and is soon advising pretty much the whole place - including "Warden Norton" (Bob Gunton) on all things financial - some above board, some less so. The film is set over a period of over ten years, and depicts some of the most brutal aspects of prison life; but also some it's more hopeful. It deals with violence and desperation but also of bonding and lasting friendships and loyalties that long term close-confinement engender. Frank Darabont elicits the best from his three principals superbly, with added venom provided by guard captain Clancy Brown and humanity from prison librarian James Whitmore - one of the few who actually does make parole. The last half hour is up there with the best cinema has ever had to offer, and this - again on a big screen - is a must see adaptation of one of Stephen King's lesser known, but better, stories that delivers a redemption never, quite, anticipated by the prison service!

This movie is great

This is much more predictable and Hollywood than a King novel.
This story of another man wrongfully in prison for murder joins the list of about every other movie about a man sent to prison for murdering his wife.
And therein lies the problem. Most of the time, the killer is the husband, and most of the time the right man is in prison.
Juries are now doomed to consist of several people who are brainwashed by this constant propaganda Hollywood gives us and think accordingly.
People are not gods. They are souls and spirits that can only withstand so much brainwashing.
Add to that, the story plods along with really nothing new to add. It's a very formula movie.
I won't say it is a "bad movie". Those are ones I give 1 or 2 out of 10. But 3/10 is what I call the very boring, unimaginative, safe, non thought provoking movies that you forget about quite quickly.

No 1 movie for all the time

First time seeing this in probably close to 20 years, maybe longer. Forgot how excellent of a movie this was, amazing all around from the performances, Morgan Freeman and Tim Robbins especially, with a roller coaster of emotions. The writing (from Stephen King's novel) direction from Frank Darabont was precise and just all around fantastic. This is the very rare 5 star movies I've given but it is easily one of the best movies, right up there in my book with The Godfather. **5.0/5**