Unnamed: 0
int64 22
574k
| text
stringlengths 50
9.87k
| label
int64 0
1
|
|---|---|---|
349,584 | This movie is mediocre, with a cliché story, like many others about memories and romance. Also, the romance is not dramatic enough for entertainment purpose. The heroine's performance is tarnished and not convincing. Jim is great, sometimes making me laugh so loud. But sometimes did not speak clearly enough. Elijah Wood is mediocre as usual. In my opinion, he is more suitable for a role of goody-goody, instead of this one. "Eternal sunshine of spotless mind" is nothing special. Only watch it to kill time. I have not understood why it get a high rate yet, since I could easily give a very long list to beat it. | 0 |
495,155 | This is the reason why I love film. It´s cool, visually brilliant, playful acting. Sam Raimi has done a funny and cool film. | 0 |
516,976 | A momentous task in my life is done - I have watched Showgirls- and I have to say it was better than I expected but still not worthy of more than 3 stars.Let's start off with the lead actress (Elizabeth Berkly). She is the worst I have seen. She had one facial expression, sucked at trying to be serious, and couldn't dance her way out of hell(lots of huffing and puffing). I didn't even think she was that good looking, she has a horse- face. She had no grace at all and looked ridiculous in her role. The lead character, Nomi , said she wasn't a whore but oh she really played the whore/slut card pretty darn well throughout the whole movie.Every single character seemed to blend together and was lifeless. Really, there were no stand-out characters, they all were one-dimensional and had less expression than a plastic Barbie doll. There was nothing genuine about anyone, they were just trashy, self-centered, sex egotists, and didn't have the slightest emotional appeal. Throwing in that Andrew Carter guy was a very bad mistake as he served no purpose in the film and the background on him was non-existent. He was a big jerk to begin with and when he said "I like your ass", he turned out to be just a dirty- minded scumbag who thinks of women as nothing more than something to grab onto and enjoy. At least he got his ass kicked by Nomi.Surprisingly, this movie proved to have some entertainment value, albeit in a different sort of way. Lots of sexy dancing and adult oriented behavior but other than that the movie seemed to drag on for more than its worth. The first time I saw the nudity and sexual scenes, I was like "Yeah, this movie isn't so bad" but then it started to be poured on and on, relentlessly, making it hard to watch. It's hard to appreciate the beauty of seeing some naked body parts on screen when you're almost seeing it the entire time. It should be treated as a reward for watching the film, that is built up to instead of making it look trashy and tasteless. Even for me it got to be kind of sickening to see all of those women walking around naked for a half hour. The plot was just plain stupid. Nomi, a drifter supposedly from New York, comes to Las Vegas wanting to become a dancer and has to climb the ladder and fight the odds to become a top Vegas showgirl. For what? Is she that trashy and desperate for a living that she has to resort to selling her body? And it was played out in even worse fashion. The jokes and humor in this film were crude and just plain unfunny. Who came up with "she looks better than a ten inch dick and you know it"? That ugly hoe popping her boobs out again and again was supposed to be funny? Terrible script and actors/actresses alike who were about as exciting and thoughtful as a glass of water.There were some highlights, if any, in this movie that seemed to hold up what was a essentially a piece of garbage film that I'll never see again. The dancing was sensational, and the Elvis-look- alike guy in the truck was cool...and...well...that's about it. The costume design was downright trashy and it seemed like every flashy dance scene had the women stripping off their clothes and being groped all over. Only a movie to see in your private time. This movie doesn't even deserve an NC-17 rating, if you even call this a "movie". It wouldn't even qualify as a good porn film. It was like a bunch of D-list actors thrown together who don't know where they are going or what to do. They just partied, danced and what not until it was over. There was no chemistry between any of the characters and the progression of getting to know any of them was lackluster. There is so much more wrong with this film but that would probably take a while to write about so I'm just going to say this movie should not be on anyone's wish list. It is the movie that should be banned all across the world (and space if there are civilizations out there). Guard your sons, guard your daughters, this movie is the god of everything terrible and an example of bad-movie making to learn from. A trashy film that even landfills would be scared of. Why it spawned a sequel, I have no clue. | 1 |
6,335 | There is a reason that films are called the greatest, and The Godfather proves it. Coppola paints a chilling picture of the Corleone family, while the cast, particularly Brando and Pacino are unforgettable. If you haven't seen this movie, then "whats the matter with you"? | 0 |
304,809 | I just got done watching Vanilla Sky, and I must say it was different! Let me just say one thing: Sit back and relax, and don't worry about figuring it out - it will do it for you. I wasted about an hour trying to figure it out, then let myself go to enjoy it.Tom Cruise was great in this movie. He played the "cocky young guy" that he is so famous for, and turned right around into a complete different character after the accident - and so effectively.This is the first time I saw Penelope Cruz act, and I thought she was a great choice (although she played the same character in Open your Eyes). She reeks sensuality, and makes you wish you knew someone like her.Cameron Diaz, where not the person I would pick for raunchy sex scenes and profanity, was convincing in her portrayal of a "stalker in love."One thing I didn't care for was a sex scene towards the end that was a little too long and disturbing for my tastes, it added to the plot, but it wasn't necessary to shoot it like that.One more thing, I don't think you have to be the intellectual that many people are claiming to be that "got" the movie, I think that is a snobby thing to say, but you DO have to pay attention. | 0 |
405,939 | This movie had really bad acting, and I mean REALLY bad acting. I laughed through the first 45 minutes and then walked out of the movie theater.I fault the script more than the actors - it just seemed like the characters' reactions to their situations was completely unnatural and unbelievable. I mean, the cop becomes interested in following a woman and her daughter for no apparent reason. And then, the woman speeds up and barrels through a gate seemingly unconcerned about her daughter's well-being.Best part of the first 45 minutes: The mother randomly finds a picture that her daughter drew with the word "SCHOOL" on it - "I think I know where I can find her!!!!" | 1 |
114,025 | What a great show, what good writing, what an original concept. I have never given a 10 before on INDB so this is a first for me. Who of us has not been bullied, been shunned by a friend, left out of a group, had a rumor spread about you, had people snicker behind your back or just made to feel inferior? Who of you were the bullies, the top of the pile, the jocks, the popular kids? How did you treat those that you felt were below you, did you ridicule, mentally or physically abuse, bring them down to make yourself look better to your friends? Most of us have experienced some of this on both sides of the line. High school is tough. bodies are changing-emotions are changing. This series forces you to look at yourself and those that gave poor rating had a nerve struck.AS the story goes, a teenage girl commits suicide. But, before she does, she make 13 cassette tapes for the people who have treated her badly in her opinion. They are passed from person to person in order an all listen to all the tapes. Although each person may not have done anything you would gauge as bad if you had done it, it is the entirety of work that creates the results.The great thing about this series is that it forces you to look at what you have done, what has been done to you and how it could affect lives. It is a perfect opportunity for you to explain to your teen that actions have consequences. It just may cause them to think before they act. | 0 |
130,507 | A great story of Robin Hood. I had no problems with variations with the story from books or other various films about the legendary character. It's a different viewpoint entirely and I like that because I am not watching another remake of an earlier movie version about Robin Hood (although I enjoy most of those movies too).To compare "Robin Hood" to "Gladiator" is like comparing "Robin Hood" to "A Beautiful Mind" just because Russell Crow is starring in the film. One has to compare apples to apples and not apples to oranges - two completely different fruits and completely different types of movies all together.Robin Hood (2010) is a great film. It's a different and refreshing Robin Hood flick.9/10 | 0 |
24,408 | (r#90) One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest was the first "favourite film" I ever had. While it is a pretty low-key film and definitely not what you'd call a blockbuster, it was so loved in Sweden that it stayed in cinemas for over 10 years! So why was this film considered so great? Well, for starters, this is Jack Nicholson at his very best, and that says a lot. Throughout his long and successful career, this might still be Jack's best performance (although I'd argue that his scorching scenery-chewing in "The Shining" is even more entertaining). The movie is worth seeing for Mr. Nicholson alone. His high energy, quietly sardonic delivery and trademark leer is pure comic gold and McMurphy is a movie legend.The supporting cast is excellent, as well: the petrifying Louise Fletcher, whose demanding screen presence almost steals the scene from Nicholson himself; Brad Dourif in the role of a life-time as the troubled teen Billy Bibbit; Danny DeVito and Scatman Crothers as one of the inmates and the warden, respectively; and even Christopher Lloyd in his smashing debut role. One-hit-wonder Will Sampson makes a great Chief Bromden, and Sydney Lassick, one of my favourite "no-name" actors, is hilarious as poor Cheswick who just wants his cigarettes.One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest is such a massive success because it balances between emotions so perfectly. To keep it simple: the movie is hilarious, sweet, touching and ultimately shattering. The climax is fantastic and will stick in your memory for a long time. Since the movie's basic plot is very simple (wrongfully institutionalized man teaches suppressed inmates at a mental hospital how to have fun) director Milos Forman can effectively play on our emotions without either manipulating or condescending us. There are no musical or visual cues that tell us what to feel, there are no wailing violins when something bad happens. Instead, the performances and story are more than enough to affect us.Milos Forman, who also cranked out several other of my favourite movies (including "Amadeus", "Hair" and "The People vs. Larry Flynt") is probably the one to thank for making this movie as impressionable as it is. There are no unnecessary scenes, no pointless fluff, no cringe-worthy moments in the film. Every scene is needed to move the plot along, to make us laugh, to make us cry. No scene feels like it could have been left on the editing room floor because every part of the film is just so damn good. Forman is one of today's most under-appreciated directors in my opinion. The guy's a genius, and this is by far his best movie.Having read the book which the film was based on, I understand why fans were disappointed by some of the changes Forman made. The novel is a brilliant masterpiece and one of the most affecting books I have ever read. Still, I don't think the differences between the book and the movie somehow make the latter worse. The most obvious change in the film version is, of course, the fact that we no longer see the story from Chief Bromden's perspective, as we do in the novel. I don't think this change was unnecessary at all and it works very well. It even adds a slight plot twist to the story for someone who hasn't read the book, but let's not say too much about that. I know how much it sucks when someone ruins the plot twist for you. *cough*The Sixth Sense*cough* :(Anyway, where was I? Despite some changes in the story, any film fan will see that this is an excellent piece of work, a perfect film to just sit back and enjoy. The script is brilliantly written and the delivery from the cast could not have been better. Overall, a great film if you want to laugh, cry, gasp in horror and just become ensnared in a simple and extremely powerful story. Is Jack's character crazy or not? In my opinion, definitely not. Well, no crazier than "the average a**hole walking around on the street". He just got sent to the mental hospital, as he put it himself, because he "fights and f**ks too much". Still it's interesting to see how far a man like McMurphy will go to get away from work, and how the other inmates - the true "psychos" - react to his extrovert and completely over-the-top persona. The inmates' transformation from quietly respectful and pathetically obedient patients to real people is brilliant. Louise Fletcher remains the same vile, quietly life-destroying nurse throughout, and in the end we cheer for McMurphy when he finally takes the law into his own hands. Fletcher is frighteningly great in her role and handing her the Best Leading Actress Oscar was one of the few smart things that the Academy ever did. A total class act and one of cinema's most memorable character studies. It's a shame her career didn't go the same way as Nicholson's - perhaps she was so overshadowed by the latter's manic performance, no one truly saw how amazing her work here really was.Simply one of the greatest movies ever made. Very few movies can touch this one. -10/10 | 0 |
367,743 | This film works. It's a fun action adventure/thriller/mystery with a dash of fascinating American history.I loved the movie yet agree that neither hero nor villain had very much characterization. The real "characters" were Jon Voight as Cage's dad and Riley as the sidekick.Both of them worked very well to provide emotional balance. As did one of the villain's sidekicks who exclaimed, after watching Cage kiss the babe while in dire danger : "Why doesn't that ever happen to me?" Made the evil guys seem more real too.Also, both Cage and Sean Bean are so good to watch that we somehow believed they had character even tho the script didn't include much. I felt Ben was never in any real danger. There was no real or else factor or any type of consequence if he Didn't find the treasure. Sure he would've proved his father right, been a miserable disappointment, but thats not really strong enough of a consequence, and going to prison was just silly.I compare this to Goonies because that film is also a treasure hunt and has a better emotional consequence I think. The kids set out to find the pirate ship treasure, if they fail the consequence is that their parents will loose their houses to some corporate monster, thus shattering the kids childhoods.I really enjoyed this movie and while I enjoyed it, I felt easy : They plan and execute a robbery that should be difficult, but they pull it off in two days? Not enough conflict or risk in the heist (understandable, they didn't have scads of time, but... eh...) The ticking clock was there, but the stakes didn't seem very high, even when they were - I never believed the danger. I couldn't get wrapped up in it (part of it, I'm sure, was two teenage idiots behind me talking through the whole thing, just begging for someone to say something so they could blow up on that person).Finally, with all the dust and spider webs down there, when the flame raced through the channels, I expected an explosion and a mess of melted gold, or at least charred documents from Alexander's library.....7.5/10 | 0 |
223,020 | "Great movie by DA rock, the greatest doable doable e champion of all time, Magill, this is great, you remember raw's 1000th episode Magill? when he singed to the goat face b+ Daniel Bryan, you look like a troll from lord of the ring, ha HA ha a Love it Magill, the greatest moment in doable doable e history Magill"" wow, did you see the rock's new movie last night, JBL? what a great film from the greatest of all time, the people's champion the rock, which you could see how he became the greatest WWE champion of all time on the WWE network on demand, only 9.99$ a month, you can see all of Hercules matches in the double double e "" aw man, how about that, Dwayne Johnson, yes, you heard me right, the rock has come back.. to movies, you can watch him too on the WWE network only 9,99 a month, please buy the network and download the app, please, to watch the greatest of all time"Yes Magill. | 0 |
167,593 | I Came Into The Theater On The 4th of July and i was so pumped my childhood was spider-man with Tobey Maguire but then i saw this was a magical film Andrew Garfield Did A Wonderful Job As Peter Parker But A Magical Job as Spider-Man He Was Perfect I Heard There Was Going To be a Trilogy So I Thought Lets See If He Can Pull it off For 2 More Films Then There's The Gorgeous Emma Stone Playing Gwen Stacy I Thought She Was So Adorable In This Film Her and Andrew Are So Cute Together and I'm a guy The Best Part Was The Acting and the effects are great The Lizard Just Pops Out At You and i saw this in 2D so amazing the one thing i hated was it felt like they skipped like 20 scenes | 0 |
475,906 | Is Moon, the first film by Duncan Jones, David Bowie's son, recalling 2001, or does its excavating station on the far side of the moon just happen to date back to the 2001 epoch, which was indeed eight years ago? I'm prone to the second theory. After the mission carrying Dave Bowman vanished beyond Jupiter, the human race decided to concentrate on the moon, where we were already, you will remember, directing activities. In Moon, the inside architecture of the new lunar station was inspired by the 2001 ship, and the station itself is supervised by Gerty, more of a companionable version of HAL 9000 that elusively bolts around.One can't peg the story's period, but this station on the far side is geared by a single crew member, Sam Bell, played by Sam Rockwell. He is the entire film, which is really the biggest plus. As an actor with such pure and natural presence, he has been criminally underused, and now we are trapped with him all alone with absolutely no one else around, and he must carry the film all by himself, much to our delight. He's working out the final days of a three-year contract and is near breakdown from isolation. Talking to loved ones via video link doesn't do the trick. The predominantly computer-programmed station traverses lunar rock to extract Helium-3, processed to supply Earth with pollution-free power.I want to take a step back and consider some latent issues in the film. In an era when our space and distance barriers are being pushed way outside the human comfort zone, how do we cope with the trials of space in real time? In reduced gravity, how do our bodies handle the diminishing of bone and muscle mass? How do our minds deal with such seemingly infinite cycles of seclusion? The 2001 ship dealt with the corporal trials of its centrifuge. Dave and Frank had each other and HAL. Sam is all on his own, save for Gerty, whose voice by Kevin Spacey proposes he was programmed by the same voice synthesizers used for HAL. Gerty seems sound and affable, but you never know with these cybernated things. All Sam knows is that he's past his best before date, and about to be reprocessed back to Earth. Space is a bleak and desolate hole without mercy or care. Sam has no reliefs at all. Who would enlist for this assignment? What kind of a corporation would ask him to? We, and he, eventually catch on. | 0 |
296,151 | Fluffy tale of Jonathan (John Cusack) and Sara (Kate Beckinsale) who meet cute in a department store, spend the day together and then part without revealing names. She puts her name and number in a book and he puts his on the back of a 5 dollar bill. Sara says if fate wants us to meet, we'll find those. As you can see reality stops right here. Years later they're both set to marry other people...but still pine after each other. Then they set out to find each other. Guess what happens?Utterly predictable with a seriously stupid plot line that works somewhat well. It's got a nice romantic feel, good music and very good acting. Cusack and Beckinsale are both attractive and utterly believable as the couple and there is very strong support from Jermey Piven as Jon's best friend and Molly Shannon as Sara's best friend. Also Eugene Levy throws in a hilarious performance as an anal store clerk.Still, I'm only giving this a 6--and that's mostly for the acting. The movie is not that funny and, even at 88 minutes, it feels padded. Also you know EXACTLY where this movie is going to end up so there's no suspense. Basically we got a 1 hour TV movie padded out to a 90 minute theatrical feature. Way too light but somewhat enjoyable. | 0 |
343,728 | I saw this movie today expecting big things because of the 7.7 it got on the website. I thought it was a good story to adapt to film, but was not done properly. The movie did not push the theme of the film enough, the theme of hope in hard times. It did touch on it in the narration, but was not thorough enough. I also thought the races were a little far-fetched (the jockeys talking during the races), but I know nothing about horses so maybe i'm wrong. The film tries too hard to become an epic. Probably more than half the film has an orchestra in the soundtrack, which gets annoying over time. Also, so much of the races were shot in slow-motion with the orchestra, instead of the race commentary. On the other hand, I thought the acting was very good, especially Bridges. The film had barely any references to gambling, which was good as this would have made the film more superficial. The movie probably goes for 10 mins too long in the first half, but is made up for in the second half. Overall, 8 out of 10 (very good, but not great) | 0 |
360,004 | Mike Nichols has caught lightning in a bottle with this baby, a dark twist about romance-gone-wrong which, on a more personal level, I will always approach with some ambivalence. This gripping epic involves Clive Owen, Julia Roberts, Jude Law and Natalie Portman all over each other over a long period of years during which they love, hate, cheat and make up (not particularly in that order). It's one of those films that makes you think long and hard about you life and the relationships you experience along the way. I also can't help but feel that the conversation I had with my Ex Girlfriend after watching this together led to our eventual break-up. Oh well.(Note: don't miss the magnificent song "The Blower's Daughter" by Damien Rice from Closer's soundtrack. Such a sad, touching song). | 0 |
23,034 | It has been echoed an infinite amount of times before. It has been chanted from the highest hilltops and the most well known critic sites on the internet. It has been said time and time again. Star Wars Episode 5: The Empire Strikes Back is not only the best Star Wars movie, but the best movie sequel ever made, and a prime example of how follow ups can match up and even prevail over their predecessors. While I like the prequels and the film that started it all in 77, The Empire Strikes Back has always been the SW film that glowed the most for me and had the best scenes out of the entire saga. It also introduced my all time favorite Star Wars character and my favorite movie character in general, brought to life by a man who based the character's look and facial expressions off his own. The Empire Strikes Back is the ideal Star Wars film for me, and although it received a mixed reception when it was first released, it has garnished a monstrosity of a following these last couple decades and it shines as one of the greatest sci-fi thrillers with loads of twists and turns to quench your thirst. From the opening battle on the snowy world of Hoth to the final confrontation between Luke and his soon to be revealed father, Darth Vader, this film has a scale, a scope, a powerful, eminent feeling to it. John Williams' exuberant score plays through like an orchestra at an opera and each scene carries suspense and magnitude as you see the events the main characters must live through. As a sequel, it also digs much deeper into the characters' souls and puts them up against powerhouses we never thought they'd go up against, not even in the first movie. Luke Skywalker must train to become a jedi on the swamp planet of Dagobah and at the same time, he must learn what makes the ways of a jedi work. He must be patient and believe in the unbelievable, which is something he fails to do at first (That is why you fail!). He also must learn to avoid the temptations of the dark side and learn what the force is all about. The force is not always about lifting things and tricking people's minds, it's a much bigger entity than Luke could ever imagine, and it's something that touches every life form. In a peanut shell, the force is with everything and allows all creatures to coexist and be bound together as one solid package. This is one of the many lessons Yoda teaches Luke in the second act of the movie.Luke's friends, Han and Leia are also met with extreme challenges in this sci-fi sequel. As they are constantly on the run from the relentless Empire, they must learn ways of hiding and working together for the benefit of surviving the Empire's vicious clawing. Han and Leia must also balance their romantic feelings for one another and learn to get along as well as not let their inner devils get the best of them. But in the realm of seriousness, there is also a bit of comedy and endless excitement. I love Han's relationship with C-3P0 (Never tell me the odds!) and that the Millennium Falcon is always malfunctioning and breaking down. It can't even make the jump to light speed, which it did so frivolously in the first outing. The chase through the asteroid field remains one of my all time favorite scenes out of the saga and John Williams' score for the scene amplifies it's awesomeness. Now let's talk about Yoda, my favorite Star Wars character and movie character of all time. Designed by Stuart Freeborn, Yoda drew inspiration from Albert Einstein, Buddha and even Kermit the Frog, but overall came off as a wise little creature with a brain as big as the galaxy itself. He undeniably has the best dialogue out of the movie and at times, it's hard to believe that Yoda was a puppet and not some real life alien from another world. Luke takes his teachings seriously, but when Vader uses Luke's fears to his advantage (by torturing Han and Leia), he flees in a state of franticness and his inexperience is the main reason why he fails against Vader in the Cloud City "windy room". When Darth Vader revealed himself to be Luke's father, many jaws dropped, many undies were pooped, and many gasps were heard throughout the theaters back in 1980. Today, the climatic twist is still as legendary as it was then and it has been lampooned bazillions of times on television shows, parodies and other movies. What makes the scene great is the build up. It's something we weren't expecting and when it came, it smacked us hard in the faces. Of course, there is so much more to talk about, like the Fett man, the awesome Harryhausen style stop motion of the AT-ATS and the tauntauns, the brilliant, exotic looks of the environments and the overall quality of the film, but I've rambled on long enough. The Empire Strikes Back is a mesmerizing experience that still holds up some 33 years later. If you had to watch one Star Wars movie and didn't know which one to watch, why not give this one a viewing. I don't even think you need to see the first film to enjoy this masterpiece, for it's energy and richness makes it stick out like pink hair. It's truly an experience that will leave lifelong lasting memories, so if you need a getaway, take a trip to that galaxy far, far away and let George Lucas' imagination do the talking. | 0 |
418,265 | I thought they rushed it. I know they can't put everything in but I think they tried to hard to include everything and it ended up being all to quick. They could have cut out a few of the things they did include. I thought they followed the story well even though they did change /alot/. I /hated/ the casting of Mrs. Figg was terrible. All in all quite good. The acting has really improved but I was disappointed that Ron and Hermione weren't in it all that much. I don't think Luna was as dreamy and "weird" as she was in the book but still very similar. -SPOILER WARNING- I also didn't like how they used the AK curse to kill Sirius. I guess we can now rule out him coming back to life in book 7. | 1 |
83,348 | I found this film terribly underwhelming. Part of that may well have to do with my expectations set by the gushing praise I've heard before, and the one review I read here before watching -- in which a girl said it was so moving she cried.I didn't think there was anything moving about this film. An interesting narrative, to be sure, and containing some very compelling scenes, but it hardly seemed like anything original, and some of the scenes were totally hackneyed. Man ascends mountain and reaches up to the firmament, camera pans around at majestic landscape, & so on.There just seemed to be far too many clichés in this film for it be called moving. The sister's voice over narration, full of tired praise for her brother's intelligence, adventurous & rebellious spirit, &c, became tedious. His parents were caricatures of the suburban American nuclear family. The 'nature good, cities bad' message was more than a little heavy-handed, particularly in the Los Angeles scenes.I found it annoying that in several instances the lead actor looked directly into the camera (for instance, when he is eating an apple early in his travels). For me it shattered the attempt at realism and the sense of isolation and freedom the character was meant to have.Overall, while not without a fluid plot, solid acting and shots of stunning landscapes, the message of the film itself wasn't anything new, nor was it particularly well put. It was ho-hum at best. | 0 |
185,730 | Stunning visuals and a play on a concept we've seen before in other "the earth is uninhabitable" post-apocalyptic movies. The loneliness of setting and characters adds to the great atmosphere this movie gives. The movie is also quite slow-paced but that is complimented by the isolated feel of the main characters and their roles, rather than being some gun-ho style of movie which sci-fi movies tend to be. Great soundtrack too with some tracks perfectly tied into the expected feel and sonnd of the drones. This is a great example of modern-day science-fiction without being an all-out war with alien invaders. Highly recommended. | 0 |
413,135 | Babel, in my opinion, most definitely deserves an Oscar nod, at least for directing. This movie will have you on the edge of your seat from beginning to end. The movie, in true Iñarritu fashion, does not have it's sequences in order but rather scrambled up like in Iñarritu's previous work, Amores Perros and 21 Grams. The movie takes place in three, or I should say four different parts of the world and three different continents. It starts off in a remote desert in Morocco, where we meet some preteen characters who are brothers, who bicker with one another like normal brothers. The younger one is always showing off to his older brother and between the horseplay and the show off he ends up doing something which will set off events in those three aforementioned continents. Also in Morocco, we meet an American couple, (Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett) whose relationship seems to be on the rocks and for unknown reasons are in that country, but the wife is anything but happy to be there and wishes to leave as soon as possible. In another part of the world, San Diego, California, we meet a Mexican nanny, (Adriana Barraza) who takes care of two American children like they were her own, later on, she is faced with the decision of attending her son's wedding across the border and leaving the children with someone else for the day, or staying and taking care of the kids whom she was trusted by their parents who are overseas at the time. She ultimately decides combine both and takes the 2 children across the border with her with the help of her nephew (Gael García Bernal). In yet another part of the world, Japan, we meet a deaf-mute girl (Rinko Kikuchi) who does not have a very good relationship with her father (Koyi Yakusho), and whose mother has passed away recently. She craves for attention but always feels like she is treated like freak when she is among normal people. As the movie develops, you will start to see the connection between these three totally different stories and the dots will start to connect. Irresponsibility and lack of communication are the main topics in this movie. There is a cameo by Crash's and WTC's Michael Peña as well as Clifton Collins Jr. The acting on this movie is superb, especially by Adriana Barraza and by Rinko Kikuchi, those two deserve an Oscar Nomination and deserve to win it too! There are very touching moments in this movie that will probably jerk a tear out of more than one moviegoer. Not for all tastes but if you're in the mood for a movie with good storytelling this is the one for you. 9 out of 10. | 0 |
460,849 | This was a great adaptation of Charles Dickens classic story. The movie stayed very close to the original story line. The computer generated animation was fantastic, as well as the sound. Jim Carrey did a wonderful job of playing Scrooge. My favorite movie version is the classic, Scrooge with Alistair Sim as the title character. It is obvious that Jim Carrey's inspiration is indeed Alistair Sim, as he sounds just like him and some of his dialog is straight out of the Sim version. The 3D effects were probably the best I've ever seen and this plus the IMAX added greatly to the experience. I recommend seeing this film for the holiday season. I should state that some parts may be a bit frightening to small children. | 1 |
256,548 | A terrible movie; disjointed, unfunny and insulting to both women, who are presented as puerile passive/aggressive victims, and men who are either vacuous jocks, selfish idiots and/or cyphers. The movie doesn't have an original, amusing or insightful bone in its indeterminable length. Watching this movie was like having a kidney stone.The movie made quite a profit. One can only assume it was due to the presence of the word 'bad' in it's title. Previous movies with 'bad' in their title such as Bad Santa and Bad teacher were masterpieces compared to this rubbish.Despite its faults the movie still obviously takes itself seriously. It's theme of female assertiveness is meant to be profound but is depicted in the movie by the 'bad' moms getting drunk and molesting men and generally acting like 15 year old males supposedly do as shown in broad teenage angst movies.I repeat this movie is terrible. | 0 |
315,143 | I picked this movie as a usual Friday night movie and I didn't expect that I was gonna cry at all. But to be honest, I cried so hard. and let me warn you, this movie MADE YOU CRY OUT YOUR EYES.If I'd describe this movie in a word, that would be "Pure". The love between Jamie and Landon was so sweet and pure, and all the beautiful scenery used in this film made their relationship look more pure and lovable. Their pure love reminded me of my young love in high school and made me realize how the relationships I'm getting into lately is messed up and not that pure anymore.BTW, Some people might think these kind of movie is cheesy or too romantic, and I agree with those opinion, this movie could be cheesy and "try to make audience cry too hard" kind of movie, but still, considering those aspects of this movie, I'm telling you this film is absolutely worth to watch.Great scenery, great music,great cast, and great storyline. What else do you need? just watch it!! | 0 |
540,439 | After some success Kevin made bad movies,maybe for your own fault and may be arrogant and selfish,but in this picture has a great premise spoiled by ultra nationalist direction....so hard!!!Could be a better result if loaded the colors of primary Americanism...Tom Petty former member of super group Traveling Wilburys make a short appearance as Mayor and yesterday died at 66 years old...rest in peace Wilbury...Resume: First watch: 1999 / How many: 2 / Source: Cable TV-DVD / Rating: 7 | 0 |
60,076 | Asghar Farhadi's new film after the ingenious 'About Elly' is running for the Golden Bear at this year's Berlin Film Festival and, with half of the competition done and the rest of the program not looking too promising, appears to be an almost inevitable winner. Although maybe it won't for that very reason: Jahar Panahi's repeat inability to attend his jury duties because of Iran's government refusal to issue him a travel permit, a retrospective of his works including the 2006 Silver Bear-winning 'Offside', a variety of other Iranian productions and renewed demonstrations in Iran proper put the spotlight firmly on that country's elaborate, yet constrained film industry. All that buzz may outshine the film's artistic value, and prompt the jury to go for a less favored competitor. I should hope not, for Farhadi manages once again to embed lots of social criticism into a straight-laced, realistic narrative.As in 'About Elly', the story begins rather unassumingly and takes an abrupt turn into a spiral of increasingly dramatic events: Nader and Simin are a couple about to break up over the question of moving abroad, for which they have obtained a permit after waiting for 18 months. Nader, however, has his father to take care of, who is suffering from Alzheimer's. Sirin still wants to leave, but not without her daughter (yes, pun intended) Termeh, a somewhat shy, bespectacled 11-year-old who cannot accept her parents' break-up. She therefore decides to stay with her father, which prompts Simin not to leave the country, but move to her mother. Nader is thereby forced to hire someone to take care of his dad, and a colleague of Sirin recommends the pregnant Razieh. Being deeply religious, she should not work in a single man's household, but her husband has been out of a job for a long time and is threatened with jail by his creditors. Her pregnancy and the necessity to attend to her daughter additionally stress her out. When Nader comes home one day to find his father left alone and tied to his bed, a struggle with the returning Razieh ensues, with catastrophic consequences for everyone around...This is a much more complicated set-up than in 'About Elly', but it allows Farhadi to put a lot of additional information into his film as may be obvious to those who are just trying to follow the story (I hesitate to give examples because the film is as of yet to be released in Iran, which means an open-source comment such as this one needs to be carefully phrased). Much of the action takes place in courtrooms, where judges try to negotiate between the parties without any lawyers present. There's a lot of familiarity, and also a lot of menace, which succeeds to create the same climate of anxiety, accusation and deceit as in 'About Elly'. The realism of the narrative is embedded into a carefully planned scenography which makes almost every shot linger in the memory. And as in 'About Elly' the decisive moment, the one that solves the mystery is omitted in the picture, only to be explained verbally at the very end.What makes me feel even more for this film is the fact that it might be the last film of its kind from Iran for some time. Ali Samadi Ahadi, the German-Iranian director of the comedy 'Salami Aleikum' and the upcoming documentary on the July 2009 protests 'The Green Wave', wrote that the film industry has come to a virtual standstill. 'Nader and Simin' was in development at the time of the protests; since then, regulations have become far more repressive, with even established masters like Kiarostami or Makhmalbaf forced to work abroad, and others threatened with jail and work prohibitions, of whom Panahi is only the most famous example. All the more reason to give this film the credit it deserves - winning Berlin may cause Iran's bureaucrats to reconsider, for cinema is almost the last link remaining to our world. Without film, how could we understand that Iranians are a modern people with issues like our own, and not dangerous fanatics as some media and politicians would have us believe? | 0 |
392,953 | This one, which stars Oscar-winner Judi Dench and nominee Bob Hoskins (the two also produced), can be filed in the "British historical cute narrative" folder, along with "Calendar Girls," and "The Englishman Who Went Up a Hill But Came Down a Mountain," among others.Dench is the title character, whose husband dies in 1937, leaving her a very rich, yet very bored member of the country's elite upper class. Trying her hand at embroidery, charities and chatty women's clubs - detesting them all - she happens to spot an abandoned theatre one day and takes a notion that she should buy it (what the heck, she has the money).Of course, since she has no idea how to run the establishment, enter Vivian Van Dam (Hoskins), an entertainment aficionado trying to hide his Jewish roots with a thick accent and an even thicker coat of bluster and brass. He envisions a continuously-running musical revue, which for a time is very popular. Unfortunately, other venues begin doing the same thing and the Windmill Theatre begins to lose money.In a desperate attempt to stop the bleeding, Mrs. Henderson comes up with the idea of an all-nude revue ("Just like the ones in Paris," she intones), but this is not France, and she is duly chastised by the Home Secretary, Lord Thomas Cromer (Christopher Guest, "Waiting For Guffman"), whom she has known since he was a boy, and calls "Tommy." He consents to the nudity - as long as the young women do not move - like a tableau - so she agrees and the productions begin to take shape. These are quite inventive, with the naked women being displayed tastefully behind silk and saffron curtains and posed in artistic and historical mock ups, such as the Venus Di Milo, Cleopatra and assorted Greek goddesses.Meanwhile, Mrs. Henderson finds herself falling for Van Dam, but he doesn't feel the same way (for a very important reason). She also sets up a young girl, Maureen (Kelly Reilly, "Pride & Prejudice") with a soldier - an act which has disastrous consequences. These minor subplots, however, are just back drops for the nude production numbers, which grow more complex as time goes on.Finally, there is the introduction of World War II, the Blitz (constant Luftwaffe air raids on London) and other atrocities, but the show must go on. Despite almost being closed down by the government, the show must go on. The boys fighting at the front need to see a few naked women before facing Hitler's forces.This film is basically saved by the supporting work of Will Young (as the very gay actor and choreographer, Bertie) and by Dench's lead performance. It is a deep, moving, often funny portrayal which - in a very weak year for women - may be enough to earn her another Academy Award nomination. Other than that, the picture is a decent diversion, perhaps a little too cute for its own good, but interesting nonetheless. | 0 |
353,177 | The Day After Tomorrow is a well done action thriller where the world seems to fall at the hands of mother nature. Is it all the fault of the bad climates or do humans have something to do with it all? You will have to watch and see. Apart from the almost unreal consequences that rapidly seem to unfold during the course of the film, there are the usual parallel love stories and funny side characters that seem to have some say in the overall outcome of the story and other small nuances that make the audience laugh, or at the very lease, just smile. Would I have gone to see this in the theatres? No. In fact, I don't think it was in the theatres for very long, probably one of those summer flop films that survive for just entertainment. I do however think that there are some important messages that the US administration has to say at the end of the movie almost touching, in fact. Aside from its oddly James Bond type title, be aware that the action is more real and the science more Bond-like. Be prepared to say "that's just not true, and wouldn't happen." The special effects are superb and show off what modern CGI graphics can pull off without cardboard cutouts. RATING: 6/10"Uh, you guys there are some books on Tax Law here that we can burn!" | 0 |
468,936 | 'Law Abiding Citizen' has all the right ideas but its on-screen execution is nothing short of a mess. The film starts off well enough and sets up a plausible scenario, only to undo all of its efforts by going down the 'make it up as you go along' route, with the second half of the film being nothing short of silly and amateurish. It jumps from one far-fetched scenario to another, before falling flat on its face with a ridiculous ending.There's enough going on to hold your attention throughout, but the second half of the film is so unconvincing that it becomes just another comic-book style action flick with zero depth or substance to any of what happens. It's disappointing given the potential that this film had and the promise that is showed in the first half or so. 'Law Abiding Citizen' is a watchable action flick, but the second half is way too far-fetched to be taken seriously. | 0 |
541,176 | I Know What You Did Last Summer is a horror film about a great of friends who hit a stranger in there car and decide to bury the body, but they are not so shore if it's still buried. A great young cast starring (Jennifer Love Hewitt), (Sarah Michelle Gellar), (Ryan Phillipe) and (Freddie Prince Jr) I Know What You Did Last Summer is definitely in the wake of Scream and other earlier horror flicks but the storyline is original, the acting was strong from Hewitt but not so much from the rest of the cast, A Predictable horror flick but I just like the adrenalin rush of a film like this for what it was light entertainment I can say I enjoyed it. | 1 |
456,940 | On the night of February 11, 2005, Kristen McKay (Liv Tyler) and James Hoyt (Scott Speedman) left a friends wedding reception and returned to the Hoyt family's summer home. The brutal events that took place there are still not entirely know.According to the FBI there are an estimated 1.4 million violent crimes in America each year. The scary thing is that this film is inspired by that true event which happened on that day. The whole reason this film differs from other scary movies is that it could really happen in real life and that is what I think the director wanted you to see. It seems like when directors make scary films there are always so cheesy and not really real like they would actually happen that way or realistically happen. For some people this may keep them up at night worrying and having terror that this might happen to them. Rarely would you get that scared if you were older, but I could see it happen to a younger kid if you let them watch this movie. It might have you leaving your night light on also just to help yourself sleep at night after watching this.The director set out to show you something in this film, weather it be to scare you or give you his vision or what really happened from true events that took place there. When you get your imagination going you can think of anything and it you could make it make it greater than even you set out accomplish it to be. | 1 |
482,228 | This is a fun movie. It's part love story, part tragedy and a whole chunk of comedy to keep it moving at a good pace. I would say this is probably one of Whoopi's finest acting performances - OK it might be lightweight and comedic, but hey, there's nothing wrong with that!!! And it takes a great actress to pull off comedy the way that she does! Plenty of sentimental moments. It's simplistic in its message, but that's not a flaw, it's an accolade. If you've experienced somebody very close to you who has died, this is the way you would like to think that they cross over, if you believe there's something else after this earthly life. The sentimental scenes are acted beautifully. Sit back and enjoy! | 0 |
452,058 | Hancock, is about a immortal man, John Hancock (Will Smith) with supernatural powers and a major attitude including drinking problems, who is hated by the public. When Hancock saves Ray (Jason Bateman), he is offered help to improve his public image. While working with Ray, Hancock meets Ray's wife, Mary (Charlize Theron) and son, Aaron (Jae Head). What Hancock cant figure out is, why Mary is so unsure and cold around him. But after Hancock figures out the truth, he starts becoming mortal, and maybe the only way to get this powers back is to get as far away from Ray's family as possible. I thought Hancock was a stunning movie with many chilling surprises. Charlize Theron was brilliant, and her coldness towards Hancock was extremely relevant and played an important part towards the end. Jason Bateman played a fantastic role as a supportive and faithful friend towards Hancock. Jae Head was very cute, and a great actor. But Will Smith was clearly the star, as he transformed from a rough and hard man , to a kind and brave hero. I loved Hancock, it was a truly fantastic movie that made me think about it, even after the end credits popped on. | 1 |
357,956 | Perhaps this was the most gory movie Mel Gibson ever directed. It even surpasses "Braveheart", in which Mel not only directed, but also acted as character Sir William Wallace. It was like Jesus was the new William Wallace, but to Christians, this "William Wallace" was attempting to deliver a prophecy, where Jesus was going to be handed over to the priests of the temple, betrayed, arrested, mocked, scourged, condemned, and finally, crucified in Golgotha---and on the third day, be risen again.The flashbacks of Mary Magdalene, and another Mary Magdalene, which represented Satan, were almost overblown to the point that it lagged some parts of the movie. There was an understanding of that Satan when Jesus was crucified, when Satan disappeared when the temple broke in two. Other flashbacks that took place, especially after Jesus's arrest, were good enough....especially the flashback where a woman, who was about to be stoned to death for being caught for adultery, blesses Jesus when the stone throwers dropped their stones and went away.The part when Jesus was scourged resembled almost that in the movie "Jesus Christ Superstar"...at the beginning. Like both movies, the counts during the scourging are yelled out, although in different languages. He was whipped about 25 stripes, with cat-o-nine tails, before I thought it was all over for Jesus with the whipping.Then, in probably in a sort of lust that Jesus was the Messiah, the two scourgers did a about-face to hurt Jesus even further--by whipping him with cat-o-nine tails laced with nails. I think a total of 100 lashes occurred with this new torture...before the scourgers were ordered to stop.After the scourging was all over, you see Jesus's blood all over his body. It was like as if Jesus was immersed into a bath containing hundreds of crowns of thorns, or thrown into a bed of nails several times.Such torture from Jesus's scourging had never been found in most other Passion movies, although some show you the crown of thorns and of course Jesus's hanging from his crucifixion.And unlike other Passion movies, the lust for Jesus's death in "The Passion of The Christ" came even as he let his head fall forward, and his face never goes up again...signaling the end of Jesus's life. One of the guards who saw Jesus on the cross, who realized that the temple's veil in Jerusalem was split in two, decides to pierce Jesus's chest with a spear even though he was truly dead. As the blood gushes out of the chest for the final time, that part was the most shocking part of the movie I had ever seen. | 1 |
73,931 | Boyle directs this in his usual teenage-style of fast cuts, cool music, and with little real empathy for his characters. Trainspotting is so overrated, largely because its unique in its own way.I've watched countless gory horror films, yet the scene where the sh*t hits the... well bowl in this case, was probably the most abhorrent thing I've seen on screen. Was there any need for it? Does anyone want to look at human feces on screen?Boyle is not a good director, despite the hype. Watch the Beach again, and Trance, the boring Sunshine, and he just comes across as if he's just graduated from film school and has all these cool tricks to try out. No depth I'm afraid | 0 |
252,568 | I am quite surprised at the rate of bad reviews for this movie (on Metacritic). Is it perfect? No, not at all. Is it a satisfying movie experience with a couple of weak spots? Yes, absolutely.I admit, people who've played the games (both WoW and the strategy series) will enjoy this movie far more than a person that had no experience with the franchise. Let's start with a couple of scenes I think fell short. Garona's assassination of Llane had a weird vibe to it. Why not do it like it was done in the lore? It would have made the experience far richer and I think Garona still wouldn't have been an antagonist, but her character would have definitely become more appealing. I think that was a missed opportunity.The romantic stuff was... well, to me it was a little cringe-worthy, but not TOO bad. Nothing tops the overly awkward chemistry between Natalie Portman and Hayden Hayden Christensen in Attack of the Clones, so perhaps that has given me a higher tolerance of cringe-worthy romance. It did not fill too much time, so I don't hold that against the movie. The dialogue however could have been written far better than what we were given.Why not destroy Stormwind City like it happened in the games? That would have been fantastic and actually been a far more dramatic finish! People who did not know the franchise before would have been surprised at the outcome of the movie. The ending just felt a little TOO Hollywood I'm afraid. The pacing: Jesus Christ, everything happened so FAST! I really think some people who haven't played the games were/will have trouble to grasp what's actually happening. It feels like there is no quiet moment, no second to breath and while some may like that (hell, I understand the appeal) I belong to the people who prefer it when there are a couple of scenes that let settle things for a moment. However, I admit that that is just my personal preference.More positively, because I feel like I bashed the movie, while not trying to do that: The little winks now and then to fans of the franchise. I couldn't help myself to smile and thought they were entertaining and thankfully not overdone. The cast seemed perfect, although I imagined Lothar to be slightly older than in the movie (but I love the actor, so f**k it). For the most part I think they stayed as true to the lore as they could, and I believe that the ending was done the way it was, due to intervention by the studio. The action sequences were enjoyable and the movie gave me everything I expected of it. No more, no less... and considering many horrible video game adaptations in the past that is not meant as an insult. | 1 |
339,040 | This movie is a chilling story of what it is like to be 13 years old in today's society. We all identify with wanting to be accepted. We all remember the transition from pre-teen to teenager. I actually identified with almost every character in this movie. It opened my eyes to the danger in which kids today can find themselves. Two thumbs up! | 0 |
303,396 | I heard all kinds of good things about this movie and I finally got around to watching it on cable. This film gives a new meaning to the word downer. It also gives new meaning to the word gross but I'll get into that in a minute. Masterful acting by all involved. Peter Boyle, Heath Ledger, Halle Berry and Billy Bob Thornton. Even Sean "P. Diddy" Combs. Who knew Puffy could act?! A word about ol' Billy Bob. He's a great actor, but he's also a gross weirdo. That brings me to the sex scene with Billy Bob and Halle. Man, it was like porn. Lots of shots of the beautiful Ms. Berry's body. Lots of shots of the not so beautiful Billy Bob. She really deserved that Oscar let me tell ya. Talk about taking one for the team. I wonder if to keep the mood light Billy lapsed into his Slingblade character. "Halle you smell just like fried taters mmm hmmm." All joking aside though it really was a powerful movie and one that showcases the acting talents of everyone involved. Bottom Line: It's not uplifting, but you should check this one out all the same. | 1 |
365,263 | Collateral is pretty much a long, very interesting conversation between two opposite characters. On one side, you have Foxx, who plays a relaxed, nice, friendly but clever taxi driver that is only trying to make a living and save up for later plans. But then you have Cruise, whose character is an ice cold killer, who is "indifferent". He shows absolutely no feelings towards killing people. I like the way they develop the characters in the movie and the performances are great.Interestingly, although Cruise is the bad guy, by the end of the movie I found myself wondering, who should I cheer for? Someone is going to die, but I liked both characters so much, I couldn't decide which one should live and who should die. That is a great sign from the movie.There are flaws, in my opinion, as some scenes don't pack the punch I wanted them to, for example: when Foxx goes to a club to talk to Felix, the scene is supposed to be one of the most intense in the film. Not to say that it's not intense, cause it is, but it felt to me like it should have packed a harder punch. Another example was the club shootout, a scene that should have been awesome. It's only good, mainly because it doesn't focus on Cruise like it should, and instead, we get way too many shots of other people in the club.Some things in the dialogue also feel rushed and not as "clean" as they should sound. Like when Foxx handcuffs the cop to the car after the crash and tells him like Vincent told him: "When did this become a negotiation?" It just feels like some of that dialogue could have been avoided.I liked the ending, I loved that Foxx, although unskilled in the art of manslaughter could kill Cruise and he didn't believe it.Collateral is a great movie and, although it doesn't have the best cinematography at parts and the dialogue feels a bit rushed at times, the movie is still very much worth it. | 1 |
305,655 | I myself am a summer camp counselor, and when i saw this movie it reminds me of all the awesome stuff you get to do as a counselor. Despite of out of whack it seems, it's a little close in some actuality. It's an hour and half of fun! It just gives you a chance to laugh, and have a good time. Great movie if you want to laugh, and be reminded of every great summer you've had! Despite the sick humor, and the swears, it's pretty much just a good time. There's one "gay" love scene but it's 20 seconds long and nothing graphic, and it just adds more to the story. then there are so many jokes taken from old school 80's summer camp movies. There are drug references, and sexual references but all of those can be over looked. The cast is superb some of the best names in comedy coming together to create something hysterical! Highly Recommended! | 0 |
563,375 | This film has it's overall funny moments, but more than that it is entertaining, in a Ghostbusters type of way. It was a pretty good effort. Not only that, sure kids will like it because of it's stars (Tim Allen, Sigourney Weaver) and it's sci-fi stuff, but adults and film buffs will just love the constant references to Star Trek and even a poke at the documentary Trekkies, which looked at the same type of conventions they have here. In this film though, while it does follow a Trek formula in sci-fi mode, in story we see a group of actors (Allen, Weaver, Tony Shalhoub, Daryl Mitchell, Sam Rockwell and best of all, Alan Rickman in a british Spock character) who were once members of a successful TV show (Galaxy Quest) who are now reduced to being at conventions and appearances at car places. Until a group of actual aliens, who think the TV show is historical documents, come to the actors thinking they are the real people they played and get them to help out with there cause. OK, so that plot may be confusing for some, but if you just want to have fun watching it, that's cool too. Cast is good as well. A | 0 |
499,214 | This film is my favorite. It shows how a Chinese man in his thirties falls in love with a 15-year-old girl. Although she is not conscious of the love she feels for him because of the social pressure she has to face, young Marguerite Duras (the film is based on her autobiography)completely abandons herself to the man and discovers true love. To me, the way the film was shot is quite poetic, even artistic. Far from conventions, The Lover is an immersion in colonial Asia. You can smell,ear,taste and touch what the characters are experiencing: something unique that even time can't erase. | 0 |
529,661 | The first real mission for the new generation of Enterprise fleet and for me this was an outstanding entry in the franchise. Bye bye to the annoying Data like in Generations welcome to the real Data. Not only that, this delivers also on the part of effects.Not only was the story great because it's full of action from the first minute until the end. It was watchable due the great effects not only in space but also on the make-up. Borg looked stunning and all cyborgs did work out fine. Sure, you will be reminded of Species (1995) and The Terminator (1984) when you see the Borgs but never mind, it isn't a copy.If you don't are a Trekkie geek this one surely can be watched without knowing a thing about the Enterprise. Great flick.Gore 0/5 Nudity 0/5 Effects 4/5 Story 3/5 Comedy 0/5 | 0 |
283,317 | From seeing the ads, I figured, "Okay, a bunch of guys go out on a boat and get caught in a bad storm. I hope there's more to it than that."Now that I've seen it, my view is, "Okay, a bunch of guys went out on a boat and got caught in a bad storm. It's a shame there wasn't more to it than that."The special effects were well done, but the token character development felt rushed or forced. None of the characters were engaging in any way. One of the crew was barely allowed to speak. Two others hated each other for no apparent reason.The side story involving a sailboat crew was almost completely superfluous; the movie kept cutting to their story, but those characters never crossed paths with the main characters, and they barely even provided a plot point.
Several other characters were introduced as if they'd matter later, but they got thrown aside. The meteorologist, for example, was just there to point out that the storm was bad (duh), but he had nothing else to do with the rest of the movie.Yawn. | 0 |
540,179 | So many movies are re-done, dumbed down, car chase explosions, and no more. The Cube has some original ideas, great use of an interesting set, and is well acted. Although not without flaws, it held my interest from beginning to end because it challenges the viewer. One actually has incentive to think. All in all, I might even watch it again someday. I'd encourage anyone who likes sci-fi, or plays like "Waiting for Godot," to give this unusual movie a viewing. | 0 |
129,453 | True Grit: An excellent American novel, by Charles Portis. I've seen every film version, and read the original book.Story: Mattie, a young woman, travels far from home to claim her father's remains, and hire a bounty hunter to bring her father's killer to justice. Mattie, in this movie, is characterized perfectly: She is independent, humorless, businesslike, brave to a fault, and very direct in manner and speech (criticizes others without hesitation), but impeccably honest. And, she expects the same from others.Rooster (Bridges), the man she winds up hiring to capture her father's killer, is shabby, careless and crude in habits and mannerisms. He often takes liberty with the truth, even under oath in court. But, his reputation as a killer of men impresses Mattie enough to override any personal distaste she has for him.What follows, turns into a legitimate adventure. When Rooster catches up with the killer of Mattie's father (Josh Brolin, as Tom Chaney), he is in the company of a gang of Desperadoes, including Barry Pepper (also wanted by the law). Rooster and his Texas Ranger partner are unfazed by being outnumbered and outgunned. To grizzled veteran Rooster, it's just another day at the races.Much excitement follows, in the grand surroundings of the American West. Close encounters in the woods ensue, with the upper hand changing sides several times. Mattie becomes a hostage. Now, Rooster's bounty hunt turns into a rescue mission as well. An excellent performance is also turned in by Barry Pepper. His countenance and mannerisms flesh him out as an intelligent, deadly adversary. Josh Brolin correctly depicts the character of Tom Chaney - a man who might have once been intelligent, but who has descended into alcoholism, murder and theft. He tries to speak eloquently, but his articulation is slow and almost painful to listen to....he is a ruined man. Many people, myself included, will question: why was this movie even made? After all, John Wayne really covered it well in the 1969 version (one of the best performances of his career). I would say that this movie, in some of the details, is more faithful to the original book - especially in the depiction of Mattie's character and ultimate fate. There is just a tinge less "Hollywood" in this version, compared to the Duke's. It's a tad more gritty and realistic, which I always seek in a Western movie. It is an excellent re-make, up to date, which if nothing else, will appeal to younger viewers. Those younger viewers may be more able to relate to this version of True Grit, simply because it was not filmed decades before they were even born....and, they get to see actors in this movie that are still alive and making movies today. That alone justifies the making of this movie.If this movie were not a remake - if this was an original screening of a written story; the first effort - I would have rated it a "10". | 0 |
498,895 | The quick and obligatory warning: Dead Alive (as Braindead really ought to be called) is not for everybody. Heck, it's not for most people. But if you think that the idea of a zombie baby getting whacked with a swing is funny, or that endocrine systems can come alive, or that rat monkeys are the root of all evil, then it just doesn't get any better than this.I can't think of more than a half dozen movies that give me as much pleasure as Dead Alive. It's laugh-out-loud hilarious throughout, strangely touching in places, and the gore is meted out in the most original ways possible. I'm a big fan of George Romero's Dawn of the Dead (the best of the "Dead" series, as far as I'm concerned), but Dead Alive is the king of Zombie movies. While Dead Alive lacks Dawn's comentary on modern society and its media critique, it far more successfully handles of the issue of what would happen if two zombies had a baby. And sometimes that's just what you want in a movie.Braindead (or Dead Alive, to keep things confusing) is really just a sweet story of a boy named Lionel (Timothy Balme) and a girl named Paquita (Diane Peñalver) who are meant to be together. And, as the timeless tale goes, the boy's demanding mother just doesn't approve. However, when the mother gets bitten by the Sumatran Rat Monkey and becomes a zombie, well, the relationship is put to the test.That Dead Alive is able to bounce between being a parody of classical Hollywood romance, a terrifying ooze-fest, and spine-rippingly hilarious is a tribute to Peter Jackson. Jackson has written and directed five full length features and for my money he hasn't missed once. While his first zombie film, Bad Taste, is really only a warm-up for Dead Alive, and his first Hollywood film (the criminally underrated The Frighteners) was a box office disaster, Jackson has a unique visual and tonal style. Even though the relationship between Paquita and Lionel is meant to be humorous, it also feels completely genuine. Amidst the puss is true loopy charm. That's how the man behind the raunchy Muppets off-shoot Meet The Feebles could also gain true critical credibility with the Kate Winslet film Heavenly Creatures. Jackson has yet to prove that there's anything he can't do.
Dead Alive is bouyed by a number of game performances. Clearly neither lead is a great actor, but they both throw themselves into the characters producing both chemistry and a Bruce Campbell level of campiness. And as for the collection of bodily fluids, muscles, and organs on display, much credit to the technical staff.If you don't like Dead Alive, you'll have turned it off within ten minutes. If you stay for the whole thing, though, you'll love it. Dead Alive is a running exercise in bad taste, a series of escalating gags, all of which work perfectly. I figure this one is good for a 9.5/10. | 0 |
77,002 | I'm sorry but this comment is a spoiler as there really is not much to tell. Will anybody who rated this movie over a 4 please email me and let men know what I missed in the 2 hrs that went by. Yes Javier plays a brilliant role of a psychotic killer but other then that what else is going on. I would truly like to see the genius of this movie that won so many awards and that has a rating of 8.5. Psycho guy, Javier, walking around killing people with what I can only assume is an old scuba tank. Brolin, finds a drug deal gone bad takes the money and the gets chased by men who want it back. And then Tommy on the other hand, chasing both of them, while trying to tell a non existent story. Oh I almost forgot, the ending, WOW, where was it? Let's see 2hrs down to five sentences. OK so what did I miss that had to be prolonged into two whole boring hours of very incredibly annoying and tedious dialogs and scenes, like watching grass grow. Waste of two hours unless you bring a your grandma's knitting gear. | 1 |
155,450 | For the most part I enjoyed this movie, but it seemed a bit rushed and shallow. Perhaps, because the writers were too busy making fun of certain stereotypes and being socially political. Perhaps because, being residents of the U.K. they were caricaturing caricatures and trying a little bit too hard to dispel others. Maybe they were just having too much fun on their U.S. road trip.I also found too much of the acting overly hammy. Somebody has to play the straight man, but there's little of that. I could've used a little less toilet humor as well. As they actually say in the movie "You have to pick your spots"All that aside, the basic tenor of the movie is pleasant because, I would guess, that there's a love of the subject matter. Also, it seems that the actors were having fun with the roles and making the movie. I've seen a lot worse, but with a bit more restraint, this movie could've been great. | 0 |
27,390 | Not an easy film to watch, but gripping all the same. Anthony Hopkins delivers one of the most complex and disturbed characters in the history of cinema, while a young Jodie Foster shines as the ambitious and smart Clarice Starling, on the trail of a deranged psychopath known as Buffalo Bill. But in order to find this man, she is going to need Hannibal Lecter's help...The horrifically disturbing manner of Buffalo Bill is powerfully delivered by Ted Levine, and in no doubt set the standard for how other thrillers are measured.The dreadful consequences of being a victim of a deranged psychopath is displayed to graphic effect in this now legendary award-winning film as we witness the horror and evil of this person's mind which in no doubt will send shivers down the spine.I've awarded The Silence of the Lambs eight points, which may mean nine to everyone else! | 0 |
559,239 | Excellent acting, good characters, a good romantic comedy. No slapstick and no sappiness, well maybe a little at the end but not too much. It also has a message about the Media, but check the movie out for yourself. Hugh Grant, Julie Roberts and the rest of the cast are all good. | 0 |
166,248 | This is as close as it gets to real life. At first i was skeptical about this movie, not sure about how i could relate to "crazies". But what caught me in the trailer was the twist of how much of a focus was put on being positive and the potential for a silver lining. In essence "Hope" So i took a chance. I haven't regretted it, from start to finish this movie was as crazy as you could get and i was able to relate to more than i anticipated. Thats because we all get a little crazy sometimes, but thats what life is about, being crazy, but the best part is what happens when he get passed crazy and how we look back at it. We need a little crazy sometimes, so we can live a little. I loved it and if you open your minds you will love it too. | 0 |
81,860 | Having already watched several of Adam Elliot's other films ("Harvey Krumpet", "Brother", "Cousin" and "Uncle"), I felt a strong compulsion to watch "Mary and Max". After all, these other films were wonderful and very original and you find yourself hooked when you watch them--though you probably won't know why. Now, with Elliot's latest film, I have a chance to finally watch a feature-length version of his wonderful and very strange work.The film begins in Australia and concerns a very lonely girl named Mary. Her parents are completely inept at parenting and mostly she entertains herself. One day, on a lark, she rips a name out of an American phone book and writes to a "M. Horowitz"--telling him about herself as well as asking him where babies come from in America. As Max Horowitz is a socially inept odd-ball, his response to her strange letter is amusing to say the least. And, through their ensuing letters to each other they become friends--an 8 year-old girl and a 40+ year-old man and the film consists of showing each writing and narrating their letters. Where this bizarre business goes, you'll just need to see for yourself. However, without spoiling the film, I can safely say that I never, ever could predict where the film would go next!! Like all of Adam Elliot films, the film is just plain odd--with a delightful strangeness you can't help but like. And, even more than his shorter films, you can't believe how much time and effort he took to make this movie. It's amazing....really. And, fortunately, his work is totally unique and inventive. Aside from his previous shorts, I've never seen anything like it--and I am pretty sure you'll feel the same way if you try this delightfully strange film. Just don't try to understand or make sense of it...it might just make your brain explode. Oh, and do NOT watch it if you are feeling depressed. Although it's got lots of funny moments, the film is VERY, VERY dark--so much so that you should think twice before watching it. And, although the film looks like a kids movie, I would probably think twice before showing it to young kids. | 0 |
158,337 | It's a trick to fill out a 2 1/2 hour movie of teenagers. And The Hunger Games has pulled it off. Every scene every shot is painfully longer than it needs be. And scenes repeat themselves often throughout the movie. Girl meets obstacle, girl stares longingly into the distance or into someone's eyes, girl moves on to next obstacle and so on. And on. And on. So other than an endless series of self contained scenes strung together doing little to move the plot along, it limps every onward, punctuated by brief flashes of the poor miserable people back home. And some kind of vague jealousy back story that's never fleshed out. As a side note I've read that the director was quite proud of his extreme and somewhat random use of shaky cam in order to impress the audience with the 'urgency' of the situation. There is nothing urgent with this movie. If you watch it, feel free to get up at any time and make a snack, go to the bathroom, have a smoke, whatever. You won't miss anything and when you return it will be like you never left. | 0 |
259,848 | What an absolutely abhorrent, abysmal, distasteful piece of crap this was. Way to butcher a classic! The original has everything this movie doesn't; and this movie lacks everything the original had; wit, personality, charm, a fun concept that in that magical way some movies just ... work, worked ...When Bill Murray flirted with Weaver in the original, and behaved just within the lines of what some may see as sexism, the ludicrous attempt to "counter" from a female viewpoint in this remake was just pathetic and outright man-hating, bashful.I sincerely hope the studio loses money on this film. That small shred of respect I had left for Melissa McCarthy (loved her in Spy) and Paul Feig (again, I loved Spy), just went RIGHT out the window.Stay away from this man-hating piece of crap. | 0 |
240,583 | The Danish Girl is not just a simple story of a man who wants to be a woman. It is a shocking story.It is not a pleasant movie in terms of making you laugh, but it can teach you a lot of lessons.It is about people who don't know themselves and suddenly something happens in their life and they want to change forever.That is what happened to Einar (Eddie Redmayne). In his case, a game led him to the most serious thing: to realize what his dream identity is.It cannot be by luck that this man was an artist, a painter, inasmuch art is a method of self-searching in the soul and the mind. Einar hadn't acknowledged that he missed something and he found it through a joke.Einar wants to be loved for Lilly, not Einar who just disguises in Lilly. The sadness of a person who seeks to find his own identity is extremely revealed in the movie.He is trying to prove that he is not insane, just different from other people. He wants to be something else from what he was born and he has the right, but bullying towards him is inevitable.The doctors all want to cure him, even lock him in a psychiatric hospital, but Einar knows he is not for that.His girlfriend, Gerda, loves him and wants to help him, so she is to blame a lot for Einar's condition, as she kind of pushed him into that. She even used him to produce exceptional paintings, which showed his female part of him. Perhaps, that was her sin. Einar's wish to become a woman may even reveal a vacuum in their relationship. Maybe he is too identified with his girlfriend.Most people will mock Einar for transforming into Lilly, but a lot of other people will be able to see beyond that: to see his soul and what his soul needs to be healed.I don't think that Einar likes men and that is the reason he wants to be a woman. He wants to be a woman because he admires women regardless of his sexual orientation as of what kind of people he wants around him. Einar lets a woman be born in him and he battles through two different sexes. So, he is confused and doesn't know who of the two selves to keep. Apart from the war he has inside of him, he has the war of the other people who can't understand him and follow stereotypes. Even already having a woman's soul, Einar does want to become a woman in display in order people to know him as a woman.It is strange that his girlfriend didn't leave him, but stayed with him and believed also that Einar is not a man but a woman. It is a sign of braveness, but also, through a different perspective, a false behaving towards a sick person.Of course, what Einar passed through might be only an illusion, a transient mood. Sometimes, people believe some things and after a period of time not, so it is kind of strange that Einar took the decision quite early. He was confident too early. He might have better waited to see whether it was just a moment of madness. I didn't like the end. It was too sad. If Einar had escaped this momentum, maybe he wouldn't want to become a woman, but that we will never know it.The film speaks about things that shock the community: people who want to change sex, people who want people of the same sex, love triangles.But in life only matters what makes us happy, whatever it is and whatever the other people would say about that.In this case, the coincidence is never a coincidence, as it helps you find what you want in life.The movie reminds us how cruel it can be to "dare" to have a dream of being something so abnormal for the community.The film also teaches us that the image can be a fallacy, so, the soul counts. When a man sees a woman becomes attracted to her. He doesn't know if she is really a woman or a man who just disguises into a woman.The film keeps the interest even of the people who are not much interested in the story as a first read of the plot.Its success lies upon that it presents everything in intense. The feelings of the two protagonists are very strong and this makes this movie very touching.It is a journey to find who you really are and what you really want in life. | 1 |
223,025 | Sometimes we just like to past the time and any old thing will do within reason. This be the case. To watch Dwayne Johnson flex his muscles is always a pleasure and the theme of Hercules is a good draw. However, these two never meshed therefore we don't get entertained but instead, pass time. How sad because the subject is rich with data that if done right would have been a blockbuster. Alas, they decided to make a quick buck the public be damned. Alright maybe little kids will like the concept. Hey, there is even one in the movie that is in awe of Hercules. Who knows? It may catch on among the kiddies...not!However, the adults don't get want they need which is seeing the legend come alive instead of taking a dive. Even the Mighty Hercules cartoons that I grew up with surpass this plus they had that catchy tune too. Have cell phone ready for texting, emailing and even take a call during this movie at home of course. No snacks or tasty drink just veg-out | 0 |
221,723 | This movie is not good. It's all over the place, and hard to concentrate on what's going on. Zero tempo. Also, they really worked hard to make it darker then it had to be. They could have cut out a third of the scenes, and the movie would have been a little better. A mess. | 0 |
380,445 | I never saw Firefly, and went to Serenity just the same.. After hearing all the fan-boy buzz that went with the show and then the movie, I believe it is well earned. The film was easily better than the last three Star Wars films, and one of the better movies I have seen this year. The characters were great, the fight scenes were very well choreographed, and the special effects were great as well. Whedon knows what he is doing, and it gives me hope for the future of the Wonder Woman movie.Looks like I will have to buy the Firefly DVD now to see what I was missing. It's too bad there are only 13 or so episodes. | 0 |
236,725 | This movie was awful. As a comic book fan I felt like Josh Trank just slapped me in the face by using so very little of the actual comics. He basically used the name of a comic I love to get me to see it and then gave me a different movie. The casting was awful (none of the characters matched their comic counter part. They were all too young so of course Reed Richards didn't have gray streaks, who thought it would be a good idea to make a tiny guy the Thing?, and was it really necessary to make the Storm family have a "modern home"? That's more of a story that would fit in the X-Men), the origins dragged on for too long, and their origin wasn't even the same! The Fantastic 4 is supposed to be all about space travel not going to other dimensions> Totally useless and rubbish movie. | 1 |
46,880 | POSSIBLE SPOILERS Even though I think this is possibly the best movie ever made, I can actually understand why someone would not like it. There is some research that needs to be done before seeing Kane to fully understand it's importance on the film industry, even up to today.There are little things about Kane that one may not know without doing some reading beforehand. For example, little things we take for granted in movies today were done first in Citizen Kane, like the filming of scenes that showed ceilings. Kane was the first Hollywood picture that had a storyline that wasn't beginning/middle/end, but on the contrary, the main character(Kane) dies at the beginning of the movie. The use of deep focus photography, ect ect. It may be a lot of boring tech stuff, but without knowing how it was used in Kane would take away from the experience when watching it.Then of course, is the comparison with William Randolf Hearst, which I won't go into because you can read about that in your own spare time.To me, this film is a brilliant display of the psychology behind a man who has SO much, but at the same time has less than the poorest individuals alive.If you do the research before seeing this film, then I would say it would be well worth seeing. In fact, I would say it's a must see. | 1 |
165,237 | It's the 50th anniversary of Ian Fleming's James Bond on the big screen, and the character is celebrating that milestone with his 23rd film outing in what would be the longest running film franchise that had seen the mantle being passed on from actor to actor, and helmed by various directors providing their vision of the debonair spy in Her Majesty's Secret Service. Skyfall continues the good work set out by Casino Royale, with director Sam Mendes achieving a remarkable balance between celebrating that milestone jubilee, while setting the stage for the future films with potential to be fulfilled.Skyfall is an ominous sounding title, and the events here close a chapter, and reopens another, with two more Bond films in the works and may be shot back to back to compensate the rather long gap of four years between this one, and the rather lacklustre Quantum of Solace. We're still firmly into Bond's reboot of sorts with Martin Campbell taking over the reins with Casino Royale after having done so with GoldenEye, which charted Daniel Craig's induction as the new Bond, and two films on we have seen a more serious Bond at work, as compared to his predecessors. This film will change all that, through the subtleties in giving Bond that unmistakable sense of humour, and the introduction of a Q branch boasting a youthful looking Q in Ben Whishaw, which puts the character in very different light from versions of the past, and promising much more fanciful gadgets (or perhaps maybe not, given the rather old school-ness of this Q) in the coming installments.And by the time the end credits roll, much of the Bond elements missing from the Craig versions so far, will have been introduced, which is a fitting way to celebrate one's 50th year, in a way going full circle. But that doesn't mean alienating the established fan base who grew from the era of Sean Connery's version, or any of the other earlier incarnations. The scribes in Neal Purvis, Robert Wade and John Logan managed to weave in a number of easter eggs from James Bond's film history into the movie, which is an extremely nice touch when they appear, to rapturous applause by audience members who instantly recognized those blast from the past nods.But the story's not all nostalgia, as it deals with a more immediate, direct and personal threat this time round, as compared to the more bombastic, dastardly plans that classic Bond villains usually have. It deals with the challenges any security agency would face in today's environment where the enemy is seldom overtly known, but having gone underground, and is rather faceless, yet ready to strike at any time. Javier Bardem got invited by Daniel Craig to play the villainous Silva, a one time collaborator under M (Judi Dench), but now hell bent on seeking revenge against M for what he calls as sins of the past. Which Bond is now only too familiar with given the prologue's botched attempt at retrieving a sacred hard drive, and M's insistence on sticking to her guns and judgement call when instructing another fellow agent Eve (Naomie Harris) to take a shot that resulting in his temporal retirement from active service.And it's rather interesting here to see a less than able Bond at work, as compared to the earlier versions where his feathers were rarely ruffled. Here, he huffs and puffs his way through, and in some ways, found himself in pretty unfamiliar territory despite London being called home. In most, if not all, of the films, he would be jet setting to exotic locations, and rarely had to operate at home, so having Bond back in London and fighting for what he believes in, is another cinematic milestone that took some 23 years to come to fruition. Daniel Craig's Bond has never been quite the polished, finished article, and this film continues in his development as the master spy, albeit one who is rather out of shape and out of touch for the most parts.The villains here were a little less colourful than their counterparts in earlier films, and I suppose Bardem's Silva is likely to polarize audiences between thinking he's the epitome of evil, or a rather ineffective one that falls into the usual trappings. There's a distinct lack of a colourful henchman as well, although Patrice (Ola Rapace) did share a very elegantly shot fight sequence with Bond, completely in silhouette, in Shanghai. Sam Mendes puts the style back into the Bond franchise, allowing this installment to stand head and shoulders above other more contemporary spy films, that any Bond film would be proud of.While other touches such as the introduction of Kincade (Albert Finney) for that connection and bit exploration into Bond's past, and Ralph Fiennes' Gareth Mallory to verbal spar with M, perhaps the Bond girls this time round lacked a little bit of presence. In fact I would like to suggest that THE Bond girl here is M herself, for having this story centered around her and the dedicated screen time she gets, as compared to the likes of Harris' Eve as a field operative with a nice final treatment, and Berenice Marlohe's Severine, which is that classical femme fatale that didn't have much to do, really.Still, there's a lot more to love in this Bond film that would rank it as good as Craig's initial film, with a more intimate plot setting that strikes closer to the heart and souls of the principal characters involved, while keeping the doors very much wide open for more adventures given a new team set in place. Sam Mendes now has the origins assembled proper, which only promises of better things yet to come in the future. Happy 50th anniversary Mr Bond! | 0 |
374,268 | *SPOILERS, I swear...* When in 1963, the two young cowboys Ennis Del Mar (Heath Ledger) and Jack Twist (Jake Gyllenhaal) met in Aguirre (Randy Quaid)'s office to look for a job, they didn't know that the coming summer was going to change their lives... forever.While controlling sheep on Brokeback Mountain, the two end up falling in love (and making love), but Ennis' fears, deeply embedded in him since childhood from witnessing the mangled body of a supposedly gay ranchero, make him reject any sort of commitment to Jack; years go by, wives (Alma (Michelle Williams) and Lureen (Anne Hathaway)) come and go, children are born, but though tenuously, the bond stays, until one tragic day, Ennis receives a postcard he sent to Jack, stamped 'DECEASED'...This is probably the most poignant romantic drama I have ever seen, especially because I could empathize with both characters involved (even though I was completely on Jack's side), while in a lot of the other films of this kind I yawn and think 'It's like the mountain which gave birth to the mouse'.I don't think this movie could have been better written, acted and directed. It almost makes me sad that 'Crash' won Best picture and not Brokeback, but then again, I would have felt the same way if the positions were reversed..And a special mention goes to the score and songs; I will never hear 'The Wings' or 'He Was A Friend Of Mine' the same way again.A masterpiece. 9/10. | 1 |
384,632 | About freaking time I find a modern horror movie that's not garbage. After the insult that was "28 Weeks Later" I was starting to get a little worried. This movie is a breath of fresh air for people like me that think horror just isn't what it used to be. It caters to a lot of fears that people have. Fear of heights, fear of tight spaces, fear of the dark, fear of loneliness, and fear of having your throat ripped out by underground creatures, among others.The only real negative I had with the film was it's use of jump-scares. Some jump-scares work because there's proper build-up to them, others are just there to get a reaction out of you. Granted, this was made when jump-scares were being used in everything to make people think it was scary, but at least it was made before torture porn was a thing. The use of confusing camera angles and light from flares and glow-sticks also adds to the claustrophobic environment. It actually feels like you're trapped in a cave with these characters, which is pretty hard to do without resorting to the "found-footage crutch". It also does a great job of building characters, the fact that it takes 58 minutes for them to start dying gives you a chance to connect with them. It might not be as good of a connection as "Aliens", but it's a lot better than college kids partying. Their actions also make sense given the environment they're in. They rush to conclusions, they turn on each other, they get frustrated easily, all of these are real human reactions.Now the ending, if you've read this far, watch the Unrated version. Apparently the Unrated version of this movie is actually the original British version. The ending was changed for American audiences and the only real difference is the ending. In the American version, the ending is more positive, whereas the British version has a darker ending. Now if you've been following me for awhile you might be saying, "Wait, didn't you hate the ending of 'The Mist' because it was dark?", let me explain. The ending to "The Mist" was terrible because it could've been easily avoided, had they waited 30 seconds longer, they wouldn't have died. The ending would've worked had David shot them, and then walked into the mist as the credits rolled. It would've left his fate up to the viewer. Did he survive, or did he die? The ending to "The Descent" is very much the same. Sarah starts to lose her mind, she's lost all her friends, and all she has is a flickering torch in a cave full of murderous creatures. She dreams that she escapes, only to wake up and realize the truth, her time is up. Her seeing her dead daughter with a cake which turns out to just be the torch also shows how far her mental state has deteriorated. It's not a feel good ending, but it makes the movie scarier because it's the sad truth, look at what I thought of the ending to "Gone Girl" if you need another example.Apart from the use of jump-scares, the movie is great, and a gem in the sewer that is the modern "horror" genre nowadays. | 1 |
113,244 | As an horror/thriller movie it works pretty well. It is very well shot, very well acted but the whole story is made obvious way too soon to keep us scared by the whole setup. Said differently what is really going on is way too technical, mundane in itself to keep the movie at the same level of anguish, horror, fantasy...I discussed it with a friend and he gave me a very good explanation of the subtext, ie. the social commentary. Most reviewers mistook the premise for a take on Racism 3.0 while it is definitely about the appropriation of Black Culture.Nobody is racist in this movie, they just overtly envy Blacks. This is just the opposite sin, the materialist stance that views other people as a way to enrich your life without giving something back. This is not ugly racism, this is only class egoism. This would be the same with the same affluent WASPs having a paternalistic behaviour with poor whites (there are movies about this: Rich bored guy goes out to have fun with simple peasants then goes back to his comfortable condo with a year-worth of shrink realization). Only here WASPs have a very specific history of poaching on new frontiers and appropriating Black Culture.So yes, despite its strengths and original premise Get Out covers too much territory from horror to thriller, fantasy and social commentary. My guess is the social commentary is lost for most... except black people but it made for an eerie backdrop which all the same mesmerized most of the viewers. | 0 |
118,086 | when i first saw the trailer,i knew it was gonna be a good show because of the casting but i wasn't familiar with Nic Pizzolato's work.so i didn't know what to expect.after i watched the first episode i was dazzled by extraordinary writing and flawless acting of all the cast specially Matthew McConaughey and Woody Harrelson.The two main characters have very different disposition and traits which i think is very amusing.the plot of the movie is quite dark and mysterious which makes it very interesting and thought-provoking.i have seen four episodes so far and it's getting better and more interesting and addictive by episode.after watching the fourth episode i have to acknowledge Cari Jojo Fukunaga's directing because of the last 10 minutes of episode four,it was just brilliant.i recommend this to one's that like complicated crime plot. | 0 |
10,709 | This is one of those movies that you will end up watching again after a while, and forget just how good it is! I think they should start playing more reruns on the TV! As far as the plot, It's a Batman movie. If you've seen one, you know what is going on. I think the main reason I enjoy this (trilogy) more than the others, is because it seems to be darker, grittier, than the others, if that makes sense.. The movie keeps you on the edge of your seat, right from the beginning. I like all of the movies from this trilogy, if I had to choose, I would pick this one as the best, although ... I will change my mind on occasion, they are all really good.If you are looking for "must watch" movies, I don't think you could go wrong with this. If you like it, I suggest the rest!I include this movie, when suggesting movies to my friends, all the time.Enjoy!P.S. - Don't forget the popcorn! | 0 |
12,598 | 12 Angry Men is A jury-room Drama Starring Henry Fonda,Martin Balsam among others.Sydney Lumet Directed this Movie based on a Screenplay by Reginald Rose. The Film starts of with The trail of 18 year old boy who is Convicted of murder of his father.The Judge Seems bored because all evidence points to Boy being guilty.After this The Case is sent to a jury room of 12 members who need to vote on it and decide if the boy is really guilty.The Law states that all 12 of them must vote the same.Everyone thinks the case is one sided except for jury #8,our protagonist.Ever One is taken aback by his vote.jury #8 explains that there might be a probability that the kid is innocent but even he is not sure.Rest of the story revolves around the arguments they have and the conclusion they arrive at.The main strength of this Movie is Its story and its characters.As we progress through the story we get interesting details about each characters and makes them unique and realistic.The Films also has a very interesting Mystery which is revealed bit by bit as the Story progresses.This makes it far more interesting.The director of this film did a great job in showcasing all these characters without getting clumsy and also interweaving a great story. The Cinematography and Score of this are also excellent and improve the film.Though this film excels in almost all aspects it sometimes feels unrealistic in some parts as characters suddenly remember minute things that happened during the trial 2 months ago and this makes a case for the jurors.Despite this slight flaw 12 Angry Men is a timeless classic which goes on to prove that Big Budget and CGI Are not required to make a great movie.All it requires is a strong Script and characters to carry it. | 0 |
156,854 | I enjoyed this film a lot; you have to open your mind and travel back in time to when you were young and your mind was always open. The film needs the observer to take a loop, sorry, leap of faith because it does take some liberties with realities. It's full of exuberance, panache and loopholes but the plot contrivances don't bear up too well against post-analysis.Baddies from 2074 dispose of their enemies by sending them back through time to be shot dead and incinerated in 2044. It would be too easy to send them straight into the furnace. The main character is momentarily nonplussed when his future self (Old Brucie) is sent back for slaughter leading to (both their) getaways from the 2044 baddies. The emphasis shifts slightly from time travel to telekinesis obviously embracing 12 Monkeys, Source Code and even Children Of The Corn. It's a bloody two-dimensional chase, with even a motive for the ultimately pointless murder of two innocent children sympathetically portrayed and glossed over. The cgi cartoonery department were overused here too, what with suspended objects monetary or animate floating around but Inception did it better. Also if a baddie from the future was chopped up in 2044 his 2074 self wouldn't be seen to fall apart dramatically limb by limb surely? By the end no matter how tender hearted the story has got you don't feel that interested in any of the characters, even to speculating how they obviously thought time could be changed just for themselves and no one else. Didn't any of them see Joan Collins in the original Star Trek for the logic to be explained simply? And on.Engrossing, always interesting, well made and a current-time passer, thoughtful only don't think about it too much. And no, I don't want the 2 hours back. | 0 |
240,934 | Here's a bloated lack of action full of talk from the Director of some really great movies. If you know the story you know the outcome. If you don't know the story you know nothing bad will happen to Tom Hanks. Maybe a John Williams score could have helped this but he didn't get the job. The movie is too long. It takes a long time getting going and you'll be looking at your watch wondering when is something going to happen.If you like 1956 and 1957 Chevrolets this movie is for you. The car is everywhere including East Berlin and even at the bridge in the title. It looks like the same 1956 car appears in different locations in the first sequence. You know a movie is not captivating if you are looking for product placement or movie cars.A couple of good performances make this bearable. There is a scene near the end where the kids call their mother into the room to watch the news story. Seems odd that they knew what was coming and laughable they would call in their parents.The Janusz Kaminski Cinematography looks good on the big screen. Maybe if you lower your expectations you won't be too disappointed. Looking for a great Spielberg movie skip this and watch "Jaws" "Munich" "Schindler's List" "Raiders" or almost anything but "Lincoln". | 1 |
75,016 | This is the standard by which all other movies must be rated. And here, with a scale of 1 to 10, this must be rated a 10. This does not necessarily mean that there are not other movies that are better, a somewhat meaningless exercise since all "10" movies must be unique, so not truly comparable. But it is useful to keep Gone with the Wind in mind when rating other movies. I cannot comprehend how people can rate such trash as Fargo or even The Sound of Music as the greatest movie ever created. I wonder how many movies they have watched? Six?Yes, GWTW has flaws. Leslie Howard supposedly refused to read the book before playing the part, and got Ashley wrong as a result. And the biggest flaw is that it glorifies a way of life based on the evil of slavery. If the movie came out today, how many people would believe that they could enjoy such a storyline? Surely it would be picketed as politically incorrect. And yet the movie, like all great movies, makes you suspend disbelief and accept its pretext.This is not entirely surprising given that the story emerged from a society, the South, that had become expert at weaving a world of fantasy to justify its unspeakably evil past, and to some extent, still does so today. There is a lesson here: movies, as art, are not about political correctness. And simply watching - or reading - a story does not somehow instantly brainwash you into believing its political message. I come away from seeing GWTW with a bit more empathy for what the South went through (I have lived in Southern states), but not a lot. And it certainly does not leave me advocating a Southern Rebel mindset, just as a movie about Nazis does not leave me waving a swastika.I still enjoy GWTW, I still rate it a 10. But the truth is, as I have watched it many times over the years, I have expected to see, somewhere, a condemnation of slavery, but have not found it. Great art expresses a truth that transcends its time. GWTW fails that standard, sadly. But it is still a thoroughly enjoyable movie. And with movies, that is the bottom line. | 0 |
207,135 | Maleficent is magnificent. The story is sophisticated enough to delight adult audiences with a brilliant take on the beloved tale with a delightful twist including the meaning of true love. The characters are sympathetic and there is enough excitement.The art direction and cinematography are beautiful. The fairy land scenes resemble a pre Raphaelite painting. The castle was a bit generic CGI. The right blend of human faces with CGI so it didn't look too animated. The director Stromberg who did Oz the Great and Powerful did an even better job here.Angelina Jolie's expressive face is the perfect showcase for the character - it is the role of her lifetime. Like the way they did her cheekbones to make it like the Disney cartoon. Sam Riley as her sidekick morphs into many fairy tale creatures crow, dragon horse. The creatures are well done not awkward in movement and not overwhelming. Elle Fanning is sweet and picture perfect for the role of Aurora and Brenton Thwaites plays her prince. The fairies including Juno Temple and Imelda Staunton are cute too.Liked this more than the Snow White movies 'Mirror Mirror' and 'Snow White and the Hunstman'. The first was fun but a bit silly and the second was too grim. Maleficent is the perfect blend of excitement and fairy tale. Most enjoyable film of the year. | 0 |
341,821 | Rarely do you see a movie that is sequel be any good. I loved the first one and the fact that Vin Diesel isn't in it really had me thinkin this movie would suck, but regardless what the rating says, I thought it was awesome, Tyrese was Superb (I didn't even know who he was before the movie-but I do now. | 0 |
54,454 | For all those bewildered by the length and pace of this film ("like, why does he show spaceships docking for, like, 15 minutes?"), here's a word you might want to think about:Beauty. Beauty is an under-rated concept. Sure, you'll often see nice photography and so on in films. But when did you last see a film that contains beauty purely for the sake of it? There is a weird belief among cinemagoers that anything which is not plot or character related must be removed. This is depressing hogwash. There is nothing wrong with creating a beautiful sequence that has nothing to do with the film's plot. A director can show 15 minutes of spaceships for no reason than that they are beautiful, and it is neither illegal nor evil to do so. '2001' requires you to watch in a different way than you normally watch films. It requires you to relax. It requires you to experience strange and beautiful images without feeling guilty that there is no complex plot or detailed characterization. Don't get me wrong, plots and characters are good, but they're not the be-all and end-all of everything. There are different KINDS of film, and to enjoy '2001' you must tune your brain to a different wavelength and succumb to the pleasure of beauty, PURE beauty, unfettered by the banal conventions of everyday films. "All art is quite useless" - Oscar Wilde. | 0 |
45,989 | This movie is unbelievable. It's much more interesting and effective than The Godfather. This movie is about the life of one gangster and it's told so perfectly that I feel like I experienced it myself. It's a crime movie but what's different about it is that we get to know everything about main character, like who was his first love, how did he met his friends, what was his first experiences with girls and many other details about his life so it seems like Noodles is a real person which you know all your life. It lasts only 4h but it seems like a life time and not because it's boring but because there is so many twists that it's hard to believe that all this could fit in 4h movie. There is some black humor and violence but that of course is not the most important thing in this film but still makes it even better. | 0 |
131,844 | I had no reason whatsoever to see this in the theater. It just looked like another Mad Max, dirty, dusty, and depressing. Like a poorly done horror/slasher movie. This proved to be something else: A stranger on a journey with incredible survival skills with a book capable of immense change and has been the subject of intense counterculture and has changed the world and lives for thousands of years. Of course, it could only be The Bible. And a battle ensues to capture the book and the power of the convicting words in that manuscript which also guide Eli's life.There are things you should have seen from the opening minutes of the film that you are going to miss until the end. This warrants a second watching. For instance, the movie all but tells you that Eli is blind from the opening scenes but you may not realize that until the end. And the Bible he is carrying is in Braille.A very clever movie. | 1 |
219,913 | Paul Thomas Anderson films in general, so far, have been films that I haven't really warmed to. I didn't really dig Magnolia and I couldn't stand The Master, so with this in mind, my expectation level going into Inherent Vice was rather flat. After watching it though, it's safe to say Inherent Vice is probably my favourite Anderson film to date, which in itself is faint praise due to my distaste for his earlier material. The film focuses on Joaquin Phoenix's, private investigator Larry "Doc" Sportello, and his plot to help his ex-girlfriend have her wealthy boyfriend Mickey Wolfmann committed to an insane asylum, yet that's as clear as the film's plot gets, with its' two and a half hour run- time being full of ambiguity and a distinct haziness which clearly attempts to parallel the drug-infested era of the early 1970's. The challenging nature of the film will definitely not be for everyone, particularly those who depend on a film's narrative being explained to the last detail, yet it's lack of explanation adds a strange layer of mystery, which in itself is rather compelling. Inherent Vice is full of solid acting, strong comedic moments, and a plot so out-of-control, it ends up being both painful and fascinating, Its' run-time is way too long, and the film suffers as a result, as many times I began to lose patience and checked how long we had left. Like I said, Inherent Vice is my favourite Anderson film to date, and it makes me want to watch his previous efforts again to see if it was just me and not the films themselves. Peace Out.Overall Score: 7/10 | 0 |
134,452 | I can understand the negative - or not so enthusiastic let's say - comments here on IMDb, because it's really exciting in the first glance; Tim Burton, Johnny Depp, H.B. Carter, Alice in Wonderland (the ultimate psychedelic story made for Burton!), Anne Hathaway. The mixture would be a rapture. And I run to the cinema the first day Alice began.The result? Well... "ummm"...!! Johnny Depp: We've seen better JD-characters just in same vein. Willy Wonka will be my all time favorite it seems! Alice: She's OK, but we've seen better young lady heroes. Lyra in Golden Compass for example.Anne Hathaway: She plays definitely the worst character in the movie. If "light side" is like that, Darth Vader can take the world. But although her character is annoyingly stupid, she's still charming & elegant.H.B. Carter: Good but we've seen better villain queens. And one thing about HB Carter, she was sooo good in Fight Club that every time I see her I remember that movie. Is it good or bad, I don't know. Didn't same thing happen to Leonard Nimoy anyway? Tim Burton: Let's be honest, we've seen much better TB movies (well we've seen worse too, but luckily I definitely forgot about these apes). This looks like a collage of old-movies in fact. Maybe that's what the problem is - we haven't been surprised like before. OK, we modern viewers can really be a pain in the a**, we can not be surprised or impressed easily like before. But blame The Matrix, Lord of the Rings, Revenge of the Sith or Avatar for that! Blue Caterpillar: Ah, greatest moments in the movie. How can a single-voice take a movie to another realm? As a result, even we may have seen better examples still this is fun to watch. Catch it 3D if you can! | 0 |
514,698 | I have seen a lot of fuss about how underrated this movie is. One has to admit that it is a very entertaining, action-packed and sometimes very funny film. It was great to watch and I had a good time doing so, but honestly, it is not a clever picture.In order to enjoy it, one has to give to it the same license as one gives to a James Bond or Harry Potter movie. If one concentrates on the fact that it is impossible for a taxi to fly in the air all through Central Park and continue working fine or that magic does not exist, then you will not enjoy certain types of films.If you think about it, there are more holes in the plot, storyline and overall logic than bullet holes in total.And I am not talking about how easy it would be to dismantle the bombs or if McClain would have died at the initial tasks, the fail-proof diversion would make no sense. I refer to situations such as when everyone in the police force, FBI and even public servants in the NY metropolitan area knew that there was a 10KT bomb in a school where one of their sons, grandsons, or nephews was studying and the story did not leak. Absurd! Or when McClain realizes that it was all a diversion and the idea is to rob the Federal Reserve. He does not tell his boss because he is not 100% sure; instead he goes inside the bank to check. And when he sees what has happened, he still thinks that chasing 14 trucks driven by an army of mercenaries with an old compact car is a better idea than calling for backup. Only when the trucks escape at the Bridge he decides it is time to tell his boss.There are movies that have all the thrill and excitement of Die Hard 3 without all this nonsense. Take for instance Inside Man. That is a clever action movie. That is why it is rated better than this. | 0 |
488,504 | This movie is one of the best of the 90's comedy flicks. Raul Julia stands out as Gomez in a rare (for Julia) comedy role, and Angelica Huston's subtle smirks and dark romantic flair is remarkable even for her, Christopher Lloyd is a great Uncle Fester in a role that seems tailor-made for him, and watch for Christina Ricci, though only 11 in this film she may well become one of the most prolific and talented stars of the next decade. From the opening scenes I flashed back to the Charles Addams cartoons (which I seem to be the only person in my generation to remember.) while remaining recognizable from the tv series it transcends it. If you somehow have managed not to have seen this film yet, or haven't seen it in quite a while, do yourself a favor and stop at your local library and browse though Charles Addams "Addams Family" comics, then rent and truly enjoy the movie from a heightened perspective. 8v} | 0 |
169,976 | This is my first review though,because I feel badly speak for this movie. Looking at poster,there was at least 3 big names (C.H,K.S,C.T) but the story was so lame.. everything just "predictable". K.S definitely ruins other stars as she was the center of the story. It looked like Xena that have herself vasectomied. I think director need to change the story into full-comedy instead of twisted lauzy- tale trauma story. Don't waste 2 hour of your precious life seeing this. My deepest condolence for K.S career. I think shes better at jumper as cameo than this. Please think before you act(ing), for your own good. Per se.. | 0 |
389,029 | Like the great hitchcock or kubrick spielberg has remained at the top of his game for quite some time. the man simply knows how to tell a great story. munich like pretty much every other spielberg film is a genuine masterpiece. he accomplished the 70's theme with ease it seemed, and the casting was stellar. It is Bana's best performance to date. Daniel Craig delivered a surprisingly great performance and Rush was on point as always. The gritty look of the film and kaminski's brilliant cinematography deliver one dynamite package. my only complaint is that it seemed a bit long and some of the scenes dragged on a bit. Overall a 9/10 seems like a fair vote for spielberg's Munich. | 0 |
241,248 | Bridge of Spies takes the audience back to a time when the entire world was on the brink of a thermonuclear war, however, it didn't make me feel that way. A plethora of small internal and external conflicts are presented in the film but it never really built up enough tension to put me on the edge of my seat. The film contradicted itself by presenting each problem as very serious with the use of incisive dialogue and melodramatic lighting without ever really letting the viewer know what was at stake. Although aesthetically pleasing, almost every scene's outcome seemed inconsequential throughout the movie. Tom Hanks did a great job with what he was given; it's the fault of the soft-hitting plot that he isn't up for an Academy Award. I have no idea what the the writers were trying to do with the Russian Spy character. If you watch the movie you'll understand. Even with all of these critiques, the film was very easy to watch and it made you want to know what was going to happen next. Despite being a good movie, it will undoubtedly be swallowed up by time for not being great. I would fully recommend this movie to any person interested in history or wants to pass two hours leisurely.Positive(s): I was pleasantly surprised with how well the movie flowed and I was never bored. Negative(s): I didn't feel any sort of apprehensive pressure while watching the film. | 0 |
488,843 | A New Orleans DA becomes obsessed with the Kennedy assassination. Although presented like a documentary, this is nothing more than a propaganda film to advance Stone's paranoid conspiracy theory. It rambles on for an ungodly three and a half hours, and it's pretty much all talk. Most of the film seems like a prologue to the final half hour, where the conspiracy theory is finally presented. Basically, Stone believes that everybody conspired against JFK, including the White House, the Pentagon, the CIA, the FBI, and the Boys Club of America. Costner's character is meant to be sincere and honorable but comes across as pompous. The large all-star cast is impressive. | 0 |
163,146 | Firstly,i want to say i love actors in this movie.I know Emma Watson from Harry Potter movies.She was a hardworking and pretty girl in Harry Potter.But now,she is a reckless girl.Already,Ezra Miller and Logan Lerman are successful of their job.Absolutely,they're talented people.Other than this,they are together in harmony. Also,the plot is very absorbing.I think it's best one type of teenage movies.It's so dramatic for me.I cried but i was a little bit happy after watch it.We're watching to the story of a teenager boy finding himself.It's reminds me when you found yourself,you will catch the real happiness.Maybe,someone makes you feel better in high-school. So,you should watch this film and go find yourself! | 0 |
54,813 | It had been a longtime since I watched a good Movie... I liked this Movie and watched it twice so far.The best part that I liked about this Movie is the lively characters was a great refresher.I haven't had a great Christmas as No hike No Promotion due to the Depression but watching this Movie was a great refresher.The Movie focuses on the education system in our country but I personally feel that the System is not as bad. That said it is also not completely a fiction as it also focuses on the pressure that our Kids are going through by Parents and teachers.Highly recommended.... and I would rate the movie at 10/10. | 1 |
277,879 | I said it before and I'll say it again, the words "family comedy" doesn't always have to translate into "lamebrain fluff." Just look at the success of "Shrek" and you'll see what I mean. Now THAT'S a film with wit and intelligence behind its silly humor, and that's why it works for both kids and adults. So I'm no longer going to say, "Hey, it's a family film. What do you expect?" Maybe all you parents out there are willing to lower your cinematic standards to please your young ones, but I sure as hell ain't.After watching that horrible, disastrous, disgusting, mindless comedy "Good Burger" (and you wonder why children's IQs are getting lower and lower by the second), I promised I would never watch another film produced by Nickelodeon EVER again! Well, being that I'm also an open-minded moviegoer I decided "What the heck?" when I spotted this movie on the racks of my local West Coast Video.The first thirty minutes are UNBEARABLE!!! I had extreme difficulty watching it straight-through. My thumb was itching for the "Stop" button like you wouldn't believe! Once they introduced the bumbling principal, I almost dropped dead. Is that the biggest cliche in the book or what??? One of my favorite comedies of all time is "Ferris Bueller's Day Off," which involves a dean of students (Jeffrey Students) bumbling around like an ape, but was he stupid? No. He was just clumsy and had very bad luck. Here, we have a stupid principal who bumbles (predictably) around, and the kids throw snowballs at him. I know that kids hate their principals (Hell, I didn't like mine all that much either), but I think it's the portrayal of adults that ticks me off. It's always a cliche in kiddie flicks for the adults to be complete morons, since it's from their point of view. And since they hate principals even more, we have to make that person the biggest idiot on the face of the planet. One of those tired cliches that you just want to beat the hell out of the screenwriters for using.To add to our list of tired cliches, we have the inevitable romantic subplot. But I will say, that chick who played the love interest was HOT HOT HOT!! Like in all these stories, she's going with this airhead jock who makes you wonder, "What did she see in him in the first place?" And the guy who has a major crush on her (Mark Webber) and supposedly seems invisible to her has this clingy female friend who clicks with him one hundred-percent and has the hots for him, but just doesn't know how to reveal it to him. It's no mystery how this is going to turn out.One critic made a good point. This is one film where you actually want MORE of Chevy Chase. He makes a few appearances as a competitive TV weatherman. Chase hasn't exactly been in his prime. His last work was a supporting role in the low-budget comedy "Dirty Work" with Norm McDonald and Artie Lange. A movie I still enjoy as a guilty pleasure, but let's face it...it wasn't a box office success, like many of Chevy's previous movies. However, he's still a fine comedian and knows how to deliver a joke. This is one of Chevy's (recent) works, where you're actually begging to see more of him on screen. Chris Elliott wasn't that funny as the Snowplow Man (though I wouldn't exactly blame him), but I appreciate his effort. Elliott is usually the kind of comic actor who can be funny if given a good script, but obnoxious if given a bad one. Here, he's in the borderline. He doesn't try to ham it up as much as, say, he did in that annoying role in "Scary Movie 2." Some of the kids were much more annoying than him. I actually wanted him to run those little ba**ards down with his plow.OK, enough with the negative. I'm not giving this film a high recommendation, but I found it amazingly innocuous (once it passed the 30-minute mark) for a Nickelodeon-produced flick. Of course, we could've done without that recurring gag involving the fat kid farting (it seems like anytime there's an obese character in a kiddie flick, he has to be the butt--no pun intended--of all the flatulence jokes), but as a general rule I found it to be a surprisingly smooth ride the rest of the way. I still received only the occasional "Ha" as the film continued to progress, but at least I wasn't grumbling like I was at first. All the story arcs are resolved in a predictable manner, but not in a way in which you're torchered by the obvious cliches."Snow Day" is not a film I'd recommend for the 18 and older crowd, but if you're an adult with children who eat up this kind of fluff, it's moderately easy to take. Just let the kids watch the first 30 minutes by themselves, then decide to join them on the couch.My score: 5 (out of 10) | 0 |
73,543 | At first, the movie seems straightforward. In Britain, a former international tennis star has quit the game to find regular employment. His wife had had an affair with an American associate of his, who comes back to them. The wife tells him that she had destroyed all the letters relating to the affair, but one had been stolen, and a note was sent to her demanding money. She sent the money to the blackmailer, only for that person to vanish without even taking it. Unknown to them, it was the husband who had stolen the letter and written the note, and is plotting to have his wife murdered-not for revenge so much as to inherit her money.His next act is to blackmail an old college classmate into committing the murder, while he arranges for his wife to stay home while he takes the former lover to a dinner party. Near midnight, the husband calls his apartment to lure his wife into answering it while the classmate tries to strangle her. But everything goes wrong when the wife ends up killing her would-be assassin instead. And then the story really begins! The husband then plants evidence to make his wife appear to have killed the man because he presumably tried to blackmail her. She is found guilty...but can she still be saved? The movie is less a thriller than a police procedural, as a police inspector, along with the former boyfriend, suspects what really happened and tries to puzzle it out.The movie is a detective story, not a thriller like "Psycho", so don't expect bloodshed and mayhem. | 1 |
294,663 | "The greatest thing you'll ever learn is just to love and be loved in return."Moulin Rouge! is directed by Baz Luhrmann and stars Nicole Kidman and Ewan McGregor. This movie tells the story of a young poet named Christian (Ewan McGregor) who plunges into the insane world of the Moulin Rouge, where he meets and falls in love with the club's most popular and beautiful star, Santine (Nicole Kidman).The only musicals I have ever really enjoyed have come from Disney. I find a musical every now and then that wasn't made by Disney and although I may really enjoy that movie, I have never found one that I have thought was an outstanding movie. That has now changed. Moulin Rouge! surpassed my expectations and I have definitely say that in my opinion, this is an outstanding movie. The songs where all great and memorable, the acting was fantastic and the movie itself looked amazing!My main issue with musicals is that I find that many of the songs begin at awkward times, the songs aren't memorable enough to remember and that many musicals have songs that I simply don't like. All of the songs in Moulin Rouge! are great and are all very memorable! All of the songs fit what is going on at that moment in the movie. One thing I would like to say is, who the hell knew that Ewan McGregor and Nicole Kidman had such great singing voices? They should definitely show off their talent more often!The songs in this film were great and so was the acting. I have only seen a couple of movies starring Nicole Kidman and Ewan McGregor before watching this and I definitely want to watch more of their movies! They both put on great performances in this film as Santine and Christian! Their chemistry was great and I would like to see them work together again in the future on another movie! We also can't forget about the performances from the rest of the cast, especially Jim Broadbent and Richard Roxburgh, who I definitely think deserve more credit than what they get! Richard Roxburgh was great as the The Duke and Jim Broadbent as Harold Zidler was a crazy performance and was one of the best supporting actor performances I have seen in a while!Moulin Rouge! was a very bizarre, crazy, depressing, happy, exciting, emotional experience. I have not enjoyed a film this much in a while! I know that not everybody will agree with my opinion as there are a lot of people out there that don't like this movie but if you haven't seen it, I personally highly recommend it! It is definitely one of my favorite musicals that isn't made by Disney, one of my all time favorite romance films (a genre I don't enjoy that much so I'm surprised I enjoyed this film so much) and one of my favorite films! This is a very different film but it's one that I don't think you should pass on! | 0 |
4,402 | The Godfather is the greatest film of all time. Films like The Godfather are the reason i have a passion and love for film. In few movies can it be said that a film has defined a genre, but never is that more true than in the case of The Godfather. Since the release of the 1972 epic (which garnered ten Academy Award nominations and was named Best Picture), all "gangster movies" have been judged by the standards of this one.If The Godfather was only about gun Mafia types, it would never have garnered as many accolades. The characteristic that sets this film apart from so many of its predecessors and successors is its ability to weave the often-disparate layers of story into a cohesive whole. Any of the individual issues explored by The Godfather are strong enough to form the foundation of a movie. Here, however, bolstered by so many complimentary themes, each is given added resonance. The picture is a series of mini-climaxes, all building to the devastating, definitive conclusion.Strong performances, solid directing, and a tightly-plotted script all contribute to The Godfather's success. Every major character,and more than a few minor ones is molded into a distinct, complex individual.The film Begins in the study of Don Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando), the Godfather, who is holding court. It is the wedding of his daughter Connie (Talia Shire), and no Sicilian can refuse a request on that day. So the supplicants come, each wanting something different - revenge, a husband for their daughter, a part in a movie.The family has gathered for the event. Michael (Al Pacino), Don Vito's youngest son and a second world war hero, is back home in the company of a new girlfriend (Diane Keaton). The two older boys, Sonny (James Caan) and Fredo (John Cazale), are there as well, along with their "adopted" brother, Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall), the don's right-hand man.With the end of the war, the times are changing, and as much as Don Vito seems in control at the wedding, his power is beginning to erode. By the standards of some, his views on the importance of family, loyalty, and respect are antiquated. Even his heir apparent, Sonny, disagrees with his refusal to get into the drug business. Gambling and alcohol are forces of the past and present; narcotics are the future. But Don Vito will not compromise, even when a powerful drug supplier named Sollozzo (Al Lettieri) arrives with promises of high profits for those who back him.Don Vito's refusal to do business with Sollozzo strikes the first sparks of a war that will last for years and cost many lives. Each of the five major mob families in New York will be gouged by the bloodshed, and a new order will emerge. Betrayals will take place, and the Corleone family will be shaken to its roots by treachery from both within and without.The Corleone with the most screen time is Michael (it's therefore odd that Al Pacino received a Best Supporting Actor nomination), and his tale, because of its scope and breadth, is marginally dominant. His transformation from "innocent" bystander to central manipulator is the stuff of a Shakespearean tragedy. By the end, this man who claimed to be different from the rest of his family has become more ruthless than Don Vito ever was.Next to Humphrey Bogart's Rick from Casablanca, Oscar winner Marlon Brando's Don Vito may be the most imitated character in screen history. The line "I'm gonna make him an offer he can't refuse" has attained legendary status, as has the entire performance. With his raspy voice, deliberate movements, and penetrating stare, Brando has created a personae that will be recalled for as long as motion pictures exist.Don Vito is a most complicated gangster. In his own words, he is not a killer, and he never mixes business with personal matters. He puts family first ("A man who doesn't spend time with his family can never be a real man") and despises displays of weakness. He understands the burden of power, and his wordless sympathy for Michael when he is forced to assume the "throne", is one of The Godfather's most revealing moments (about both father and son).The Godfather had three Best Supporting Actor nominees, all well-deserved. The first was Pacino (who probably should have been nominated alongside Brando in the Best Actor category). The other two were James Caan and Robert Duvall. In a way, it's surprising that Duvall wasn't passed over. His presence in The Godfather isn't flashy or attention-arresting. Like his character of Tom Hagen, he is steady, reliable, and stays in the background. Not so for Caan's Sonny, whose demonstrative and volatile personality can't be overlooked.Family responsibility. A father's legacy. The need to earn respect. The corrupting influence of power. These are some of the ingredients combined in Francis Ford Coppola's cinematic blender. They are themes which have intrigued the greatest authors of every medium through the centuries.Although the issues presented in The Godfather are universal in scope, the characters and setting are decidedly ethnic. Even to this day, there is an odd romanticism associated with New York's Italian crime families. The word "Mafia" conjures up images of the sinister and mysterious - scenes of the sort where Luca Brasi meets his fate. Francis Ford Coppola has tapped into this fascination and woven it as yet another element of the many that make his motion picture a compelling experience. | 1 |
192,956 | Snowpiercer is an adaptation of the French graphic novel Le Transperceneige, directed by the South Korean Bong Joon-ho and with a multi-cultural cast and special effects created by studios all around the world, making it an international film which isn't subject to the narrative laws of a specific region; in other words, it doesn't feel like a Hollywood action film, or an European art-house film, or an Asian multi-genre pastiche. Every spectator will have to decided whether that thematic confusion is good or bad. I think it's definitely good, because Snowpiercer works brilliantly in all those styles: there's abundant and exciting action during the literal class struggle on board of a train; the dramatic moments are very well executed as an integral part of the story; and there's also an eccentric sense of humor which provides a comic relief during the most tense moments of the story. Besides, Chris Evans brings a perfect performance in the leading role, bringing conviction, charisma and presence to his character. Song Kang-ho also brings an excellent work as Nam, an acid and laconic expert in security who reluctantly accept to help the revolutionaries in exchange of a constant drugs supply. On the negative side, Snowpiercer includes a few kinda improbable elements, but for the rest, I liked this film very much, and I definitely recommend it as a film difficult to classify but easy to enjoy. | 0 |
369,953 | As a huge fan of the books, we have to keep this in context. This is a movie, there is no way it could have included all of the book. I use the movies as fillers between the books, entertaining, but just fillers. That said, there were some glaring omissions that are vital to the next book. Why did Mike Newell extend the dragon scene, but leave out key characters? - because mistakenly Hollywood thinks that such exciting CGI is more important to the fans of the books than expanding characters and plot details. Wrong. But we will go and see the movie anyway.I felt the movie was chopped up. The Quiddich World Cup while fascinatingly done in the movie was over so quickly that it barely seemed to be a part of the plot. Mr Crouch is suddenly dead, but it is just left dangling. Why bother to have Sirius in the movie at all, his brief scene in the fire was really disappointing, his head should have been fully out of the embers, as in the book, not part of the embers. He was barely recognizable as Sirius. What a waste.No Ludo, no Winky and Dumbledore looking like a bumbling idiot rather than the world's most powerful wizard. Most importantly the whole end of the book is gone where he has a parting of the ways with Fudge and the Ministry of Magic, because of Fudge's refusal to believe that Voldermort is back. This whole scene sets up the next book.So where does this movie adaptation shine? In the script and the impeccable casting. Despite what some have said about Daniel Radcliffe, he IS Harry. From the first movie, his sweet innocence to how he has grown into the part, he remains the face I see when I read the books. Emma Watson needs to tone down her overacting a bit, she was near perfect in the first movie, but hasn't really developed her character much. Rupert Grint really shines in this movie, his face is handsome, and funny and full of expression, he is the perfect Ron. The Phelps boys, as Fred & George really come into their own in this movie although how they are to start their joke shop without Harry's Tri-wizard winnings in film #5, is a question since it was entirely missing from the movie. And it was nice to see Neville getting a bigger more important role, even though all of his key info was left out of the movie. And now I've read book six, Snape takes on a whole new meaning to me and again Alan Rickman has been the perfect Snape in all of the movies.The question as to whether the three main characters should remain on after the release of the 5th movie in summer 2007 seems a dumb question to me. Since when has Hollywood ever cared about the age of an actor and the part he or she is playing? How often have we had 20 somethings playing teenagers! There comes a time when the age of Daniel, Emma and Rupert will not matter to the audience. Personally I hope that they play in all of the movies.They say that JK Rowling has a big say in what stays in and what is left out of her books, because she alone knows what happens and how each piece of the jigsaw fits. She must have been on holiday when decisions were made for this movie. Perhaps "the Director's Cut" DVD will explain that also... | 1 |
140,834 | How is it that terrible movies like this consistently get fairly high rating on this site? Anyways on to the review.Overall - Bad movie, this movie is slow paced, meaningless, lacking in characters and plot, and attempts to cover this up with a ton of music.1. Gosling takes ages and ages to respond to anything, and for no reason. None of the dialogue in this film is particularly meaningful or dramatic, yet it takes Gosling up to half a minute to answer simple questions, and he does this for the ENTIRE movie. It drags basic everyday conversations into drawn out moments of awkward silence and makes Ryan come across as some sort of serial killer.2. Slow motion overload. For a film called drive there isn't a lot of speed to this movie. Every other scene is shot in slow mo, and for seemingly no reason. Every time Ryan turns his damn head it becomes slow mo time.3. Flimsy plot doesn't hold up. This storyline is crap, it is pretty basic, but because the underlying plot is so basic and it is so drawn out it is like watching an epic c rate movie. Epic as in slow and pretentious. Even the parts meant to be meaningful are not. Such as the last violent part, the one before that, the central conflict. Basically a criminal guy puts some money down on a race car so that Gosling can make some money driving it and split profits. His apparently retarded brother/partner or something decides he will steal from the East Coast mafia by knocking over a pawn shop. Correct, criminal masterminds best idea is robbing a pawn shop? No, he will actually set up a pawn shop robbery and then double cross them. But not until they get the money into their car, morons.4. Violence in this film is gratuitous when it happens, which is rarely. I get the feeling they put it in just to keep people awake from all the slow mo shots of absolutely nothing going on while shitty music blasts.5. I should have put this one first, don't see this movie because it take FOREVER for literally NOTHING to happen, as well as dragging out a fairly simple storyline that could have been done in half the time. Also, no real character development, at all. | 1 |
74,679 | David O. Selznick's 1939 production of GONE WITH THE WIND[1] has earned itself many titles over the years: the greatest film ever made, the first film to receive a staggering thirteen Academy Award nominations of which it eventually won eight awards, and the highest grossing film of all time (adjusted for inflation). Its grandeur is incomparable and its message is one we can all still relate to seventy-five years later: home is where the heart is.GONE WITH THE WIND is based upon Margaret Mitchell's American civil war epic of the same name which was published in June 1936, a few years before the film was released. Mitchell and her book became an overnight sensation, selling one million copies by the end of December. Curiously, Mitchell's publishers hadn't forecasted high sales for the book based on the fact that it was priced at three dollars apiece (the average book price in 1936 was one dollar). This gives you some indication of the mania that swept America when Gone with the Wind was released in print. Also, it's important to keep in mind that during the summer of 1936, the Great Depression was at its height, and yet people still flocked to booksellers wanting to obtain their copy of Mitchell's bestseller. Once Hollywood studios caught wind of the novel's popularity, they each fumbled to secure the story's film rights in order to be able to adapt it for the screen. David O. Selznick eventually came out on top and immediately began casting the roles of what have now become legendary literary and film - characters: Scarlett O'Hara, the novel's heroine; Rhett Butler, the exiled blockade runner; Mammy, Scarlett's indomitable maid; and Ashley Wilkes, the emotionally damaged civil war soldier. GONE WITH THE WIND tells the story of the American civil war through the eyes of the losing side: the south. The film begins by depicting the carefree, wealthy, and privileged lives of a group of prominent Southern plantation owners. In the days leading up to the Civil War, the south sincerely believed that they would emerge the victors against their foe in the north (the 'Yankees'). A war that everyone believed would be over in a month ended up lasting four years and brought the American south to its knees.Through the strength and stamina of Tara, a once terribly spoiled Scarlett becomes the backbone of her family and of the entire film, really by persevering in the face of destruction and death. A woman who was once in love with Ashley Wilkes (Leslie Howard), a man promised to his cousin Melanie Wilkes (Olivia DeHavilland), has now realized that the only man she wants to spend her life with is daring blockade runner and philanderer Rhett Butler (Clark Gable). You see, Scarlett has now matured into a strong, unwavering woman and she has come to realize that her love for Ashley Wilkes was nothing but a schoolgirl infatuation. She needs someone who is equally as strong as she is now, and no one fits that bill better than Rhett Butler does.Each character in GONE WITH THE WIND endures incredible hardships, from births to deaths, to famines and familial uproar and still each one well, almost everyone emerges at the end a stronger human being. Whether they're happy or not by the film's conclusion is another matter entirely but that perfectly illustrates how unpredictable life really is. No one is perfect and we each have our faults. A good chunk of credit for the film's endurance must be paid to the production's crew; people like director Victor Fleming, musical composer Max Steiner, costume designer Walter Plunkett, cinematographer Ernest Haller, and art director Lyle R. Wheeler all contributed to this movie's lasting appeal by creating a world in which dreams were made, crushed, and made again.The film's cast is simply marvelous with each actor completely inhabiting his or her role: Vivien Leigh captures the steely determination of Scarlett with the lift of an eyebrow and the steadfast glare of a woman wronged, while Hattie McDaniel the first black woman to win an Academy Award for Best Supporting Actress exudes love, devotion and warmth playing the pivotal role of the O'Hara maid, Mammy. Clark Gable, who was reluctant at first to accept the lead role of Rhett Butler, plays his part with gusto, determination and nonchalance. Beloved character actor Thomas Mitchell who plays O'Hara patriarch Gerald O'Hara is stalwart when he needs to be and heartbreakingly damaged when his character becomes emotionally shattered halfway through the film.GONE WITH THE WIND is not the easiest film to watch. Its content, themes, and characterizations can be difficult to witness and hard to comprehend even for the most avid classic film fans among us, but it is certainly one worth seeing (again and again if you're up for it). Its epic tale and visual scenery will blow you away and you will be left breathless by the time the end credits roll. Trust us on this one: GONE WITH THE WIND is a film that will endure for many more lifetimes. It's magic, it's luxury on a grand scale, it's as majestic as any King or Queen yet it is at the same time revolting, disconcerting, and always emotionally draining. It's a film that has earned its title of the greatest movie ever made.http://juliekinnear.com/blogs/gone-with-the-wind | 1 |
250,863 | I'll admit, when I first saw the trailers for Doctor Strange, I stepped backwards a bit fearing it was going to be Marvel's first fumble, for all those reasons you could imagine - It was using the same distortion styles as Inception, the story didn't seem appealing and not even the cast, a very well picked one, BTW, would be able to hold it... At least, on this judgment alone, I thought this one would crash on take-off.I'm relieved to tell you this take-off wasn't just successful, this one is probably the best trip you'll ever take on your life. The visuals are fantastic, the action is great, the acting is spot-on and even the comedy hits all the timings here. Despite comparisons with Inception, for it's visual style, or the origin story being a hybrid between Tony Stark and Thor, there's something incredibly organic in this one, only feeling forced or rushed at very specific points. That's about the only chink in the armor for this story, it's perfectly fine and Scott Derrickson does everything he can with it.Benedict Cumberbatch killed as Doctor Strange, this was a role MEANT for him. Yes, yes, there's the comparison with what we've seen in Thor and Iron Man, but it's an origin story, I accepted we can't get away with this and, besides, this origin is virtually the same as in the comics, well, sort of, as I said it's a bit rushed. But back to BC and how great he was in this - He can be arrogant and a tad selfish, but you relate with this guy. He's an ass at times, but you can see he does wish to do good. And the best of all, you accept and even BELIEVE his transformation along the movie, you feel like the same could happen to you if you took a trip to Nepal. Other actors also stand out pretty well in this, like McAdams, Wong, Ejiofor, and even Swinton, they all take command of their timings and weave a good impression in every scene, something I've rarely seen in any other movie. They make you laugh, they'll make you drop a tear or two and even make up a basic, but still pretty much believable drama.The visuals and ideas are simply surreal, in all the good definitions of them, and they're totally exploited here. The idea that your world can be distorted and twisted upside down, the idea that you can manipulate time with a relative ease, the idea that you can easily make up a large or smaller portal, the idea you can literally troll your enemies with magic (The final scene is literally an example), everything is done here to not only leave an impression, but make it memorable at it's core idea. That and the excellent soundtrack, courtesy of Michael Giacchino, whom already earned his place for his works in Inside Out, Jurassic World and the Star Trek reboot.The only big nitpick in this, and it's more of a nitpick than a problem, is that Mads Mikkelsen's role really could've used a LOT more time, to exploit his backgrounds and build up a lot more character. I mean, one thing the trailers showed us was a Khan vs Hannibal, and we kind of got that, but the ground could've been prepared more for the villain, something we all accepted Marvel is rarely good at. With a bit more of time, Mikkelsen could've killed it, too.But still, it's a nitpick, and it doesn't spoil what's virtually a great comic book movie, one that's on par with the standards Civil War set and successfully kickstarts Phase 3 of the MCU. What can I say but 'Come right up, 'coz the Doctor's in.' | 1 |
443,345 | This movie needs to be understood in the spirit in which it was meant. I don't like action movies or crude humour, but I enjoyed the whole because I understood where it was coming from. The initial "trailers" were hilarious and that gave me strong clue as to what to expect. As with The Player and Gosford Park (both by Altman) the main aim is to make a point that won't be spotted if taken at face value. This film works on a different level than a straight comedy because most of it is parody, and therefore the "offensive" jokes are intended to be taken in that spirit. I'm a big Robert Downey Jr fan and he was excellent in this - his true ability shone through, playing a method actor who is playing a black man playing a soldier. How many people could handle that? Jack Black's task was a bit more thankless but he made a good job of the character that he played. The cameos were great - this is another reminder of The Player (another Hollywood satire) which is full of cameos.I found the plot interesting in its own right and if you enter into the premise of what might happen if a bunch of actors were actually dumped in a jungle for real, it takes on another dimension, ie. you can also take it seriously as an adventure. I was quite gripped by the story because I wasn't sure what would happen in the end (one major character died early on). Try to suspend disbelief and not be offended, and you might enjoy it. | 0 |
470,195 | Here's the deal. I'm an elementary teacher. This is a movie based on a popular children's book. Of course I have to see it. I hope everyone appreciates that. So I dragged along a date to pick up some 3D glasses in a theatre full of bawling children... who quickly settled down once the story line got going.This is quality that has not been seen since "The Nightmare Before Christmas". "Coraline" is an absolutely spell-binding story with a solid foundation in childhood innocence combined with the eerie and bizarre. I loved the book, and this for the most part stayed very true to the book--most differences were more of expansions of the story than glaring changes. Coraline and her family move into an apartment building full of strange characters. Coraline is sad and bored and her parents just don't seem to have time for her. The only other kid around is weird. So when she stumbles upon a passage way to an alternate and magical world controlled by her Other Mother, Coraline is understandibly thrilled. And then the horror begins...The animation (or rather, stop-motion) is incredible, and I don't think the movie would have been the same with any other medium. I loved the cast. The soundtrack is properly creepy. This new 3D program is far from gimicky. But still, what truly makes this movie is the haunting story and that is probably what will hopefully make it memorable.I don't know if I would be bringing the babies into this film, but I did read the novel to my first graders last year and they enjoyed it. Frankly, I would prefer to think of this as a family movie rather than a "kiddie film" as I consider the novel a children's novel. It's one of those stories that will appeal to all ages. | 0 |
132,903 | I have to admit it, I haven't read the book, but regardless of whether it was faithful or not, this rarely ruins a movie or TV adaptation for me. That said, I can understand the disappointment of those who loved the book. However, I really enjoyed this film, it is hardly the best movie I have ever seen, but I personally consider it one of the better movies of 2010 that I've seen so far, and that is saying a lot considering how disappointing some of the movies have been.Where the film is lacking is in the storytelling. There are those who say that it gets bogged down by too many mythological references, and I have to say I kind of agree. Percy Jackson and the Lightning Thief had a brilliant concept to work from and a fairly original one at that, and while the references were very interesting and cleverly incorporated, the writers could have simplified a little how much they included. Back to the storytelling, it does have a lot of exciting moments, such as the scene at the museum with the fury, in Medusa's lair, the fight with the hydra, in the underworld and the climax, but some parts in the middle half drag and feel clunky, and I personally could have done with less of the scene in the casino.Complaints aside, the film looks incredible, the special effects are excellent and the cinematography and scenery are clever and skillful. The music only adds to the excitement and the dialogue has some very nice moments with some humour from Grover and with Gabe when he is seen on television talking about Percy's disappearance and both Medusa and Persephone are deliciously seductive in looks and in dialogue. The film also moves briskly in general, and the direction is decent. Personally I liked the acting, Logan Lerman is surprisingly appealing as Percy, and Brandon T.Jackson is lots of fun as Grover. People have said Alexandra Daddario was too old as Annabeth, I wouldn't know, but she looks lovely and is very spirited in the role. Pierce Brosnan was surprisingly good as Mr Brunner/Chiron, though it was a bit of a shock seeing him with a horse's lower body, Rosario Dawson is fabulously sexy as Persephone and Sean Bean is okay as Zeus though he doesn't have much to do. The real joys however are with Uma Thurman, who gives a delicious turn as Medusa, and Steve Coogan who was a big surprise as Hades.Overall, I actually liked this film, it was fun to watch, while nothing absolutely outstanding or mind-blowing. 7.5/10 Bethany Cox | 0 |
59,417 | First of all, I wasn't expecting so much about this movie. It had a pretty high rating at IMDb and it's praised all over the place, but I just wasn't so interested of it. Well, it turned out to be an excellent movie. The movie tells a story happening in Los Angeles in the 1950's and it tells about a corruption occurring all over the police force and a committed murder, which three different polices start to investigate in their own unique ways. Ed Exley, the golden boy of the police force, smart and the one obeying the law. Bud White, a rough man ready to break the law to seek justice. Then there's Jack Vincennes, a celebrity detective being the one who does the job for publicity and press photos, but still managing something with his smart, yet somewhat crooked ways.There are two things about this movie which make it so magnificent; The storyline and the cast. The storyline is filled with excitement and it keeps on going all the way through. After the first hour the movie kind of stops a little bit and it seems like it starts to stumble, or that's at least what you think. There are these scenes which seem like irrelevant, but they eventually get important for the whole plot in a genius way. This movie is a perfect example of how to make a real crime/detective movie, there's the crime in the beginning and after that there's just this fantastic progression of the whole investigation from the very beginning till the very end, detectives finding interesting and also very surprising clues during the progress. Then there's the amazing cast; Kevin Spacey, Russell Crowe, Guy Pearce, James Cromwell, Kim Basinger, David Strathairn, Danny DeVito.. Honestly, can you think of any better? Great indeed.This leads up myself to the acting the movie has to offer. The role performances are all in all fantastic. Ed Exley is played by Guy Pearce and I really haven't seen Pearce in a role like Exley before, but I am happy to say that he is great in it. Then there's the always superb Russell Crowe playing Bud White, the real bad ass cop. If someone can play a bad ass and look so furious it's Crowe without a doubt. He's just so frightening. Finally there is Kevin Spacey as Jack Vincennes and as I've watched more than a few Spacey movies recently I'm starting to like him more and more and he is starting to be one of my favourite actors. In this movie he still is as excellent as you can pretty much expect from him. Pearce, Crowe and Spacey shine with astonishing role performances and they are the best thing the cast has to offer. I'm not underestimating the rest of the cast at all though, as there is the fierce James Cromwell, the beautiful Kim Basinger, the somewhat charismatic and cool David Stathairn and then there's the tiny but incredible Danny DeVito, who I haven't really seen in a more fitting role and he does some damn fine job in it too. Cromwell is enjoyable as usual, Basinger does what she does best and Strathairn is the coolness itself, though in my opinion he was better in "Good Night, and Good Luck." Still a great achievement though."L.A. Confidential" offers you a great movie experience. It sets mark on how detective movies should be made and how the whole crime investigation process should be progressing. It's exciting and it's interesting, doing that all the way through. It includes fantastic role performances and brilliant characters which all in their vivid personalities will most certainly not disappoint the viewer. It doesn't get messy in any part so the viewer won't be missing anything and won't get lost, so the film is also easy for your eyes. Directed by Curtis Hanson who captures the real essence of 1950's through images and music and based on the novel by James Ellroy which is translated to a magnificent screenplay in the hands of Brian Helgeland and the director Hanson himself, it just doesn't go wrong. I'm recommending this movie to everyone; The pleasure was all mine when watching it and I hope it will be yours as well. | 0 |
490,743 | Ok, yes it was silly...but very cute. Who wouldn't watch Jennifer Connelly?! And Dermot Mulrooney as the robber was HYSTERICAL. The scene on the skates with the veil, and the scene where Jennifer Connelly is riding on the kids horsey ride and Dermot tries to get on the back. Those will stick in my head forever! | 0 |
Subsets and Splits