The previews for this movie interested me and after seeing that it was from another book series, I decided to read all of them, particularly the first one. It was gripping and kept me hooked. So, when the film finally came out last month, I was expecting this film to live up to my expectations and to my surprise, it turned out to be an intense and well-acted film. It isn't one of the best book-to-film adaptations like Harry Potter, The Lord of the Rings, The Chronicles of Narnia, and The Hunger Games, but considering that it avoided the tired trend of young-adult romance movies, this is one of the better films of the year.The story, for the most part, is interesting and kept the spirit and tone of the book intact while keeping some of the minimal changes which were acceptable. It also has some smart dialog and explains the details of how the people are trapped in a maze and their attempts to find a way out very well. The pacing is mostly decent and gives its time to develop not only the main protagonist, but the other characters as well. The music score is pretty good and it fitted the tone of the film perfectly; the direction from Wes Ball (who worked on a CGI animated short named Ruin that inspired the idea of the film) is nice. Also, the CGI visual effects on the Maze and the scenery are beyond fantastic it gives the film a big scale to it despite it's lower budget, but the best part would have to go to the acting. It had some very strong performances and portrayed the characters perfectly.Dylan O'Brien did a perfect job as Thomas, who develops from a confused teenager with no memory of who he is to a brave leader. The other characters are also good. Alby, the leader of the group of people called the Gladers in the Glade, Newt, the second in command and friend to Thomas, Gally, the arch-nemesis of Thomas, and Teresa all support the film with flawless effort. Mostly Teresa who doesn't come across as a love interest, but instead sharing a connection to Thomas. Then, there's Patricia Clarkson as a scientist who explains how the Gladers were brought to the Maze in the first place because of an experiment she and other scientists tested.Before I end this review, there are two problems that I do have with this film.Aside from the nice direction from Wes Ball, the camera angles on the action scenes felt kind of shaky much like the ones from The Hunger Games. Also, the flashbacks in Thomas's mind throughout the film felt poorly placed and could've been handled better. That's all I have to say.Overall, The Maze Runner isn't one of the best young-adult adaptations, but with an engaging story, intense action sequences, and a solid cast of actors, it succeeds as the next big franchise and due to it's sequel hook, I will anticipate for the sequel, The Scorch Trials, in 2015.
19 October 2014. The Maze Runner combines The Hunger Games (2012), Cube (1997), with Lord of the Flies (1990) into a rather fascinating mystery thriller for boys. For most of the movie, the consistency of theme and plot holds up well. The tension, the ever presence ominous sounds of the maze offers up a dread that is pervasively creepy. The stereotypical characters aren't usually overplayed and the over the top performances or plot points are mostly held back using instead more empathetic and humanistic portrayals.The ending seems like a cop out for a hoped for sequel unfortunately. And there a few moments that really do fall back into the stereotypical plot design. The humor however makes their appearances with to great effect though. This is more enjoyable movie than expected. It just misses out though being really innovative and can't quite break out of the mold of most of the other sci fi thrillers.
the maze runner 2014 movie download
The plain argument is that the side-by-side scores are real-life engaging and useful, and present an added dimension to critical reception that "pro critics" alone don't. The two typical scenarios are movies with great difference between critics and public, and those where the opinions of the two are similar, and from one end of the percentage scale to the other. Since the guideline seems to approve of Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic, then it makes sense to trust their brand fully and accept their full product: side-by-side critic and consumer ratings. --Tsavage (talk) 02:52, 23 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
First, my point was that you cannot verify that any of those people actually saw the movie, or that the majority did or did not. THey could be Chris Nolan fans, or Anne Hathaway fans, etc. This is a universal issue with online polls. True, my one score did not affect the overall rating (because there were already so many). Since you cannot verify the authenticity of the rating itself, it makes it unreliable. Just because someone else wants to report unreliable information does not mean that we should. I agree, you cannot prove that someone coming out of the theater actually watched the movie, but since they engage them in a dialogue when they poll, I'll just assume that they weed out any viewers who clearly didn't pay attention. Either way, it's a more accurate representation of audience opinion. There is no need to use RT's user ratings, when a more accurate and reliable rating from CinemaScore is available. It adds nothing beyond, "this is what people at RT voted". It's not a real rating. It isn't measured by any sort of real qualitative data. As for my voting, IPs are variable, but they don't change for a particular location (unless you specifically set up a dynamic address). IP addresses are assigned to specific devices (e.g., modems). Most homes do not set up dynamic IPs, they set up static ones. Businesses will set up dynamic IPs to reduce the workload. That said, if I log out of Wikipedia and edit, they can still tell it came from the same computer that edits under the screen name "Bignole" by cross referencing the IP address tagged with that name and the one editing. That's why anon editors are defaulted to their IP address and you can track them on here. This is how we track sock accounts on Wikipedia, but running tracers. Regardless, because we're not here to discuss IP addresses, I was logged into RT when I made my votes, and I refreshed the screen to see if the overall numbers changed (which they did). Just FYI. I've said my peace, and it appears pretty clear that there is no consensus to use ratings like RT or MC. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 07:41, 3 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply] 2ff7e9595c
تعليقات