Review
stringlengths 6
10.3k
| Rating
int64 1
10
|
|---|---|
I am not a comic book expert, but there is something I can guarantee: this film deserves our full attention. If "Captain America: First Avenger" turned out to be pleasant and full of quality, this film proved to be a worthy continuation. It will not be correct to say that I was surprised: Marvel has provided us with excellent productions, and it is difficult, therefore, to keep expectations low. However, in the end, I was satisfied.
The plot goes back to Steve Rogers' past to reveal the existence of a rival to his height: the Winter Soldier, a super soldier, like Captain America, whose origins and past are closely related to Rogers. I don't know if this story is faithful to what is told in the comic books, but I also feel that, for me, it doesn't matter. The plot is developing well, with space for action and the fight scenes are good and seem real.
Chris Evans returns to the role of Captain America, and he is skilled, heroic and energetic. Samuel L. Jackson and Robert Redford also do an excellent job, at the level of the best they have done so far in their long careers. Scarlett Johansson and Anthony Mackie seem to have received characters tailored to them, especially Johansson. Sebastian Stan is good, but he didn't get my attention much. Emily VanCamp is good, but her character is not very relevant and is not very interesting.
But where this film really excelled was in the quality of production values, and the most technical aspects. Cinematography, for example, is sharp, elegant, with excellent filmmaking and an absolute command of color, movement, and shadows, which make the film visually extraordinary. Add to that the grandeur of the visual effects, the latest generation CGI and, of course, the action and fighting scenes, and the result is overwhelming. The sets and costumes also deserve a note of great praise: I especially liked the sets at the Avengers headquarters, a futuristic and elegant complex that seems to have been taken from an urban planning project in an Asian city. The aircraft also look magnificent and impress. The soundtrack, on the other hand, is quite good, it fits perfectly in the film, but I confess that it was not in my ear and that I did not find it particularly memorable. | 9 |
Nothing makes sense in this movie. All the so called suspense is predictable. The name Monica suggests that the woman HAS to be promiscuous and HAS to have an illicit affair with anyone having an XY chromosome. Raj Kumar Rao doesn't fail to deliver another idiotic character after HIT. He sincerely needs to do something different now. I understand budget can be a problem but why torture viewers with his below average performances? Many scenes are laughable (not funny) and such a waste of raw stock. He is thrown off from the terrace but he doesn't want to know who or why. He is stopped on the highway for the tool box but the writer had dementia and could not stitch that scene anywhere. Nikki panics in a stationary car for what? I was not surprised when the film ended abruptly. I am sure they did not want to renew the rent for the studio. Waste of 2+ hours. | 1 |
This movie was frustrating, to say the very least. I went in with already low expectations and it was actually worse than I thought it would be. The characters are all brainless. The plot is so SO bad and these things drag this movie down tremendously. While there are a few scenes that are genuinely creepy it gets bogged down by how bad everything else is. None of it makes sense. Why are teenagers completely unphased by these supernatural things that are happening around them in the beginning?? They're just totally cool with possession? Even to the point where its a humorous parlor trick? No. This makes zero sense and isn't how real life would work if all of these supernatural things were real. That in particular completely ruined this movie for me. The hype built up and the scores at the present time are not representive of how "good" this movie is. Don't buy into the hype. This was trash. | 5 |
With the fabulous acting, I just loved the storyline of the series and the plot was also good but I gave 7/10 because actually I am addicted to his old videos of Angry Masterji, Titu Mama, Hola etc... But in this video I didnt get much comedy and instant laughter dialogues... | 7 |
So once again JK Rowling and David Yates have teamed up for one of the most highly anticipated sequels to what was once one of the biggest franchises ever put to film The first Fantastic Beasts was a pretty fun film with a lot of wondrous creatures and interesting characters, but when it comes to this sequel it is anything but that.
This is a movie that really tries to drag out all of its plots, and because of that it comes off as this poorly paced mess of a film. There are a lot of needless sub plots in the film that go nowhere. The romance between the characters feel forced and uninteresting. Even some of the friendships that were created in the first film don't have the same spark anymore.
The Wizarding World as a whole feels pretty empty too. The first film still had this sort of magical flare to it that made each part of it somewhat enticing. This film drains that away and turns it into this empty shell of what it once was. It not fun, and not nearly as energetic either. It's just lifeless.
The main villain is fine. Johnny Depp I felt like did a decent job as him. He was not nearly as wild and cooky as he usually is, but it still left a lot to be desired, and because of that I ended up leaving the film feeling very lukewarm on him.
The movie makes a lot of really bad jump cuts through out. There times when we get a evil villain scene and it then cuts to our heroes then cuts to a entirely different scene with another group of characters, and it just felt too much for one film to handle. There is also a lot of exposition dumps in the film that really hurt the pace of the film too.
In Conclusion this film is just a jumbled mess of a movie. The characters aren't as interesting, the editing is poor, the dialogue feels very weak, and the villain feels like wasted potential. Overall I left the film feeling very disappointed as a result. | 3 |
Such a great movie. That anyone won't disappointed. Excellent cinematography. more over Karthi and Naren both my favorite actors. showed a great performance through out in the movie. can't find any lag in this movie at least 1 second, can only say a bad comments for college girls performance, but still its good. all the best for them too. what will be in second part...eagerly waiting.....!!!!!!! | 10 |
History: Greatest military evacuation in history. Movie: 10 blokes in a beach hide inside a boat and a broken plane flies by. | 6 |
This movie has its moments, but it could have been far better had there been some background or explanation for the 'creatures'. what are they; where did they come from; something, anything. As it is, you have all these characters running around with blindfolds on, afraid of what? I prefer to see the monsters in such movies. | 3 |
Refreshing movie I watched in theaters and could not take my eyes away. I did not know it was not an American movie until I heard all of the accents but irregardless, the concept is brand new and there is plenty of horrific scenes throughout the movie. The ending was somewhat predictable but essential to complete the movie in its entirety. I would watch it again and definitely recommend anyone else to watch it as well. Great writing, acting, never a dull moment in this film as all you have to do is grab the hand and say talk to me... however, in doing so, you may see something... or someone... you wish you hadn't. | 10 |
I liked the photography. and I didn't even see the 3d version. So what if it was night time? and I was touched to tears several times. BUT...Where was dear old Peter? This one was a total imitation of Danny in CSI NY and I do not look forward to the sequel. I am not going to see the sequel cause I do not like Danny in CSI NY: a fake new yorker if ever there was one. If you look at Peter's face and the eyebrows ugh just the same. puke. Also Peter doesn't have the joy of the old Peter. Wouldn't you revel in being able to swing back and forth amongst the buildings of Manhattan????and the worst is the the ghastly Sally Field, Who is responsible for her hair and her attitude? Kill that person. Kill that person right now! Martin sheen also over reacted but his presence was a nice touch. Someone stupid is in charge of this movie. Who told Sally Field to act that way? The best things about the movie is Peter has a nice love interest not like that dog of yesteryear... and...the bad guy is interesting and I fear there is another bad guy waiting behind these characters. and the ideas are pretty good. just someone in charge of the small things has to go...and get rid of the Danny-ideation of Peter. You cant stereotype new yorkers, jerk off. | 4 |
Petition to change movie title to Guru or something other than Dev.....thank you | 1 |
And the reason for a higher rating is people actually like it. It's OK for people to like something you don't even if you don't understand why. That's actually OK. The rating apparently used to be higher and would be higher than it is if it weren't for all those killjoys whingeing and whining. If it doesn't meet your high expectations don't watch it.
I'm rating this 10 to bring the score back up as it rightfully deserves the high rating as one of the most unique celebrations of 80s nostalgia. So what if some people don't care for it, this isn't made for you. Sorry about that. I also enjoyed it as much, as I did Boardwalk Empire and Daredevil. Why do we watch TV shows? Because we enjoy the story. If you don't enjoy it where half to most other people do is that your fault or the creators? I'll leave readers to answer that themselves.
I've been revisiting a lot of 80s movies in 2016 and someone told me about Stranger Things - I held off watching it until December and held back from binging the short series to prolong the suspense, even watching a couple of the episodes twice in a row. Far from perfect but I'm very impressed with the ambiance and vibe and pacing. What an accomplishment. So what if it has mundane parts. So what if it has filler, it's stylish. Whatever flaws are present, and I'm sure there are tons (many of which have been articulated comprehensively by indignant IMDb haters), are more or less invisible to this viewer perhaps due to an 80s bias (I grew up in the 80s being born in 1979 - etch-a-sketch, chopper bikes, Garbage Pail kids etc despite being British of course I embraced the indulgent romanticism of 80s American coming-of-age movies) HOWEVER - I'm not a great fan of 80s horror and sci fi (with a few exceptions) and I can't really stand SPIELburg's overly-sentimental and crass contributions to cinema especially ET and Close Encounters. I do respect the work of Stephen King though prefer his dramas to the horror. Despite or maybe because of all this I instantly recognised and enjoyed the parallels between this TV show and 80s titles which the creators were very deliberately and conspicuously paying homage - Stand By Me, The Goonies, Alien, Scanners, the list goes on and on (there are several blogs and entertainment sites listing the titles as well as recommendations for other post-80s films and other more recent releases). Thus the intention of this series is not to be original, as expressed in the polemic of some of the haters, but the intention is specifically NOT TO BE original. In this way the Duffer brothers have tapped into a whole generation with fond memories of retro technology and a time when such technology was in its infancy and entertainment was less cynical and the world in general seemed simpler as we were less connected and consequently more ignorant than we are post-millennium. After all ignorance is bliss.
You'll notice I've not really mentioned anything about the content of the show. I'm assuming you've seen it already but if not - check it out and make your own decision. I noticed that the majority of 1 and 2 star reviews (some of them admitting that they would review it 6/10 but they deliberately rated it down to lower the mean rating - which is a cretinous thing to do) the majority of those reviewers it appears had seen the rating, or heard people saying how great it was and so then had the highest expectations - but for some reason these expectations weren't met. Personally I didn't know anything about it at all before I watched it except that it had something to do with the 80s, didn't read any reviews and wasn't aware of IMDb or any other ratings - and I enjoyed it. As a fan of comedy and fantasy but not so much of scifi horror, this show perfectly filtered and watered down vintage horror and added a watertight cast, 80s kids movies nostalgia and topped it off with a lovely ambient synth soundtrack.
So this review is for the haters. This show is not perfect but it is entirely comprised of elements that some audiences, myself included, have wanted to see for a very long time. Keep on hating, I'm waiting keenly for season 2 and if it disappoints, so what? It's not even that important! The important thing is that for whatever reasons for the Duffer Brothers, whether they wrote it or not (whereby as they didn't write it according to IMDb reviewer bradcheng; "their auteur status goes down the drain"), this is a labour of love - demonstrated by it being rejected fifteen times before Netflix - and their love for the material shows in the work, whether it makes sense to some viewers or not, if viewers have the imagination to enact, in the words of Samuel Taylor Coleridge, willing suspension of disbelief (a term which was coined in the discussion of texts like this, involving the supernatural). Like Peter Jackson the Duffers are unabashedly invested in their subject matter and though might not be pioneers of horror/fantasy/scifi they worked hard to realise their vision regardless of whether audiences think they were successful or not. Some audiences like these works - some don't. If you don't, I'm sorry for you, that you don't get it, that you didn't enjoy it. At he end of the day this TV show will quickly and quite rightfully become an instant cult classic, in the words of another historical Englishman "warts and all".
EDIT It got worse as it went along so I changed my rating from 10 to 6 but the characters are still interesting, some of the acting became a bit hammy but kinds works of course.
I won't get into the esoteric or occult aspects of the show for there are many. | 6 |
The movie starts with Enola giving us a bit of an 'up til now' biography and begins with a scene of herself as a baby with a big '1884' date splashed on the screen. Soon we are told that she is 16. If my math is correct 1884 plus 16 is 1900, and this is underscored by the fact that we see Enola riding a bicycle typical of c. 1900.
Soon, however, it becomse apparent that the costuming is wrong for 1900. Big bustled dresses are typical of 1884, and then an important plot point regarding the Third Reform and Redistribution Act of 1884 enters the storyline, and we even see Sherlock is reading a newspaper dated 1884. How can a multi-million dollar production make such an egregious error as to suggest she is born the very year the story takes place?
The writing is thin, very thin. The plot is predictable and pointless, the women are made to look smarter than men by writing the men as stupid. Meanwhile, her mother is at the source of a plot that could kill hundreds of people, and she is written as some sort of feminist heroine.
What is a shame is that the talent was there - the idea for the film is brilliant, the actors hired were good choices, but the writing, editing, and direction are substandard. | 4 |
You know this movie has hit a nerve when the Russian bots spend time to come on IMDB to trash the movie as the worst movie in the history of film making. So thinned skinned!
The film is fascinating and Jennifer Lawrence was exquisite. Her range from naive ballerina, to hardened spy, to ingenius triple crosser is magnificent. Joel Edgerton has indisputably been handed the baton as the most talented actor in Hollywood. He also does not disappoint with this role: he is tough, tender, and believable. I can't imagine another actor who could have filled this part as well as Edgerton.
I have not read the book, but the screenplay is well done - the pace of the story is captivating, each of the characters are fully developed and introduced cleverly to the audience, even when only getting limited screen time. It is fascinating how the story gets wrapped up in the end and you are in a cliffhanger throughout.
It has been decades since a really good Cold War Thriller has come out (Robert Redford Spy Games?? The Good Shepherd???) and this one is timely with the current compromise of so many in the immediate circle of the present administration. You get a peek behind the curtain of the ugly side of world affairs in this film. The use of "Sparrows" by the Russians is such a fascinating subplot.
My only question is how did Dominika find ziplocks in Budapest (or was it Moscow? I can't remember the location of the uncle's apartment).
The editing, staging and camera angles were also exceptional - when Dominika meekly walks to her first "appointment" at the hotel bar, you could feel her tension and nerves. The camera angles and the silence of just her heels on the marble floor. So many excellent scenes throughout the film that were expertly woven together.
The trailer gives away nothing which is also a great thing!
If you enjoy Jennifer Lawrence, if you are a history buff, fascinated with the current affairs of US-Russian relations, or if you just like a good action film with a wild ending, add this to your watch list. | 9 |
I found this interesting and disappointing by turns throughout all 5 episodes so far. Episode 5 does do some interesting reviewing/editorialising with the 'story so far' but even this is rather cheesy and off - if visually interesting with some necessary box ticking character build-out and plot gap filler patching. I tended to get the feeling that this production, whilst it initially feels of good quality in individual and even some cohering aspects, will date quite badly so as to appear anachronistic and cultish in future. A page turning melodrama made for a streaming service on weekly episode release isn't surprising but then perhaps neither is the slew of overly positive reviews popping up on here to 'balance out the negatives' gushing things such as "I was hooked immediately" or "it's the perfect balance of x, y & z" Sometimes a well-recorded and expertly mixed record just points out how poorly written the song was.
NB whether a post-production versioning error or wanton obliqueness, the scenes with father & daughter playing Go together were not subtitled from their mother tongue. | 4 |
Nothing you'll see will satisfy you ever after watching this masterpiece . Time paradox to character building to detailed complexities to sincere emotional depiction - Haha ! Dat got me thinking about "Christina"! | 9 |
Director Aditya Dhar bloody hell intended to make a remarkable movie, no doubt he bloody hell did! Vicky at his bloody best! Keep up the bloody Josh Mr. Dhar!! | 9 |
If you want to sit and look an OK documentary about the oil industry, and the greedy men who were behind it, then perhaps this is a good movie for you.
However, the movie is long, boring on occasion, and even worse, the whole story is very sad, the ending borderline depressive, and there is nothing to get out of this movie, except see a documentary you could probably rent elsewhere.
So why all the raving reviews you ask. Clearly written by people who like dramas, epics, and truly pathetic endings.
The few positive points of this movie: it's an epic, but boring. The documentary part is well done, but incomplete, you only get part of the story behind the early oil business, and yes the acting is very good.
However at over 2 hours 40 minutes, which feel like 3 in a theatre, it's a miracle you can stand it.
Do yourself a favor, and at the most rent this one, or rent my Left Foot if you admire the genius of Daniel Day-Lewis, otherwise save your money. | 3 |
I love how the movie glossed over any hint of romance between Dharma and the main female support lead resisting temptation of making a romance between them, as is the wont.
If you have ever had a pet or wanted one, you will instantly get hooked to this. The aftereffects linger on for a long time. Fantastic movie!!! | 10 |
A few good action scenes, Overall bland, Predictable plot twists. | 6 |
This must be the best short tv show made in 2020. A great show with an impressive story 👌🏼. In the last few episodes, it made me emotional, too. 😏 | 8 |
I was eagerly anticipating this series, having played TLoU 2 on PS twice over, so captivating was the scenario. And lo, I thought we were on a winner here after a fabulous pilot, and then a third episode which went on a bit of a digression but was so well crafted and emotionally powerful. But woe and behold what has come since. It reached an absolute nadir with the latest episode, featuring the sect-like community leader versus Ellie. What utter nonsense! I won't give any spoilers, but frankly when it comes to spoiling, this series is doing a good job all on its own with each episode that goes by. | 5 |
It's a Masterpiece go watch. Seriously the characters are amazing if you don't like the characters you have bad taste. The story is great as well | 10 |
I finished watching season 2 and love this series. I've read some of the negative reviews and like any art form, you will NEVER please everybody. Yes, at times "some" of the acting is poor/ yes, it could be "more" realistic/ yes, not every teenager will agree this is a "truthful" portrayal of the issues handled in this series according to "their" experiences, etc. etc. etc. Just as PLATOON did not portray every Vietnam Vet's experience of that war, this series doesn't portray every teens experience with bullying or peer pressure. No film could ever do that with any complicated subject but it doesn't diminish the power of the film(s), unless it is a simplistic subject to begin with, which the issues in this series are NOT, i.e.: bullying, peer pressure, school "laws", "unwritten" rules, teen sex, loyalty(either positive or misguided), drug use, rape, homosexuality and of course the real taboo: suicide. Run for the hills screaming and get out your pitch forks and flaming torches conservative "helicopter" parents and those that tried to ban THE LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST, REEFER MADNESS, FREAKS, CATCHER IN THE RYE, TROPIC OF CANCER, etc. and any other films, books, etc. that those people wanted to ban, most times without having even seen or read the subjects up for censorship. The mere mention to my adult friends about watching this show and they instantly gasped and went straight to the suicide word, as if that is all this series is about. It is one aspect, not the whole. The one issue they have not really dealt with is depression, it is touched upon and implied but hopefully they will focus more on it in season 3. As a younger teen I developed depression, social anxiety and was bullied at certain times during my academic training. While hard to watch at certain times it is overall a cathartic experience. When I was growing up none of these topics were talked about, especially any sort of mental illness. I am glad that it is finally being discussed and the mental health community is trying harder to debunk some of the old stereotypes and inform the public and I feel this show is a huge step towards that goal. Travelling on public transit I saw a BELL campaign to make people more aware of mental health issues. Even a big corporation is spending money to help us become more aware. I grew up alienated because no one talked about those things in my era and many, far too many people in my generation and centuries before were permanently damaged because of this taboo subject. For myself, surprisingly, the strongest issue the show deals with is the hypocrisy of the LAW which serves itself and not justice. The "LAW" has NOTHING to do with justice. Laws were written by Lawyers only to be understood by Lawyers to give themselves invaluable jobs. Look at any "contract" for anything and it contains 99.9 % unnecessary legalese babble only a lawyer can understand, ON PURPOSE. The Law lets defence and prosecution lawyers twist the facts around to suit their own needs to win their cases. Yet, every one called up to the stand MUST swear to tell the truth, but this same moral code is NOT taken by lawyers in a court room so they can by this loophole to silence and have stricken from the record a witness speaking if it starts to negatively affect their case. I hope this show is shown in all schools. We need to inform ourselves on all matters in this world if there is to be a world in the future. | 9 |
A well written and ill executed film.
For most of the time, people are walking in the film and that too as if in stop motion, where the slow motion comes and disturbs the interest. The climax is more or less predictable just that it had a few hints by the end and an avid film goer might have predicted it.
OK, the performances are good and I must say, post MOHRA this is the first film of Akshay Kumar I had seen in theatre and I was actually happy as it did not have fights or unwanted action sequences and instead had some brain thing. Thanks to Neeraj Pandey for not putting heavy action sequences for Akshay Kumar. Manoj Bajpai and Anupam Kher fared well. Kajal Agarwal was not needed at all, and this could have been better if the romantic track and those songs were not there.
Coming to Neeraj Pandey, the director I was very disappointed, coz post Wednesday, it gave some hope that this man may churn out some non commercial flicks and would raise the bar, but he disappointed me with the song dance number, and the love track that made me just wait to go to the real plot. It was written with a good intent but it just did not fit in as a whole.
Technically, the best thing is the meticulous production design of the Mumbai and other places of the 1980's and for this itself I would give an award to Sunil Babu. The editing falls flat and please cut off 30-45 minutes and increment the pace by making the walking as they are and take off the slow motion and for 75 minutes, you will get a wonderful ride otherwise it made a just above average flick. The time of nearly 135 minutes was made for the sake of making and I did not see any real purpose behind that.
A generous 2/5 for a well designed film more than anything else. Neeraj, you disappointed me big time, need to see what you got up your sleeve next. | 4 |
Argument worst than an 5 years old child. Vilan ?? Holographic Vilan?? Wtf | 4 |
SECRET SUPERSTAR
Duration : 150 Minutes Genre : Drama
Zaira Wasim : the fresh face which we all first saw in Dangal has now turned into a star, she shines completely, and justifies the term "Superstar" in the title. One can see, how genuinely she plays Insia. Meher Vij : She portrays Insia's mother, who complements Zaira's character like no other. Applause worthy! Aamir Khan : He plays Shakti Kumar. We have all seen Aamir in his different avatars, and the audiences should not be missing this one! He is hilarious! Raj Arjun who plays Insia's father is ferocious. Tirth Sharma who portrays Chintan is lovable.
Story : Secret Superstar is a story relating to a daughter/girl who dreams to be a singer; A mother who loves her daughter like no other but also feels helpless at the same time; A father who is stubborn and violent towards his family; A friend who would go to any limits to help out the girl he adores, and a struggling arrogant music director who turns out to be the helping hand in the girl's life. Secret Superstar will make you angry, love, laugh, weep, smile in its 150 minute duration. It's a story of the bond of a mother and her child. Advait Chandan has done a remarkable job on this one.
Music : The tracks of Secret Superstar maybe just ordinary, however "Main Kaun Hoon" wins hearts.
Overall, Secret Superstar is a must watch by all ages. Aamir Khan Productions bags in a sure shot winner this Diwali. | 9 |
Only an accent that you could accept if it was your own Only a character you could like if you loved the books Only a mystery by name as the answer is written on the same page upside down Predictable murderer, annoying detective, only good as background noise if you have already paid for your Netflix subscription.
A story that feels like it is entirely based on Elon musk the only saving grace was definitely Daniel Craig's highly fashionable swimsuit better than James Bond. After the terrible nature of the first movie, I am not sure why there was a second ward audience. This is playing to. I love a mystery. This is not it. | 1 |
There is an old saying don't believe all you read and that sums up this series in a nutshell. It is no way as good as the hype and to get a 10 it must be a bot writing.
The premis of the story has so many holes in it it's embarassing and tests the intelligence of any viewer. You will watch because you will be expecting it to get better, it doesn't, but you will be saying to yourself. it has to have some meaning and it must improve. There is logic in the short viewing times, no one could last an hour watching this drivel.
Very disappointed so be warned. | 3 |
If you are looking for yet another good war film, look no further: 1917 will keep you on your feet throughout and only someone completely heart- and mindless would not feel for what people on screen have to go through.
Yet, why? Why are we making these films about war, where filmmakers and storytellers try so hard to make us believe how terrible and traumatic war must be? Listen to soldiers, civilians, all of those people who had to experience it, read history books, watch historical material.
Film wise: great cinematography, acting, sets. The rest is the usual formula you will see in all other war films. After watching it I felt like, what did I expect, why did I even watch it?
It makes me feel bad giving a lower rating for the film, reading that some veterans would give 10 because 1917 feels so realistic. No offence in any form. I guess if we would really honour the fallen from the wars in the past, we should stop making new ones in the present. This film made it absolutely clear for me: I don't need to see the brutality and senselessness of war anymore; I got it before, really. | 5 |
This was not a good film . Dead pool set the bar for anti hero movies . This did not come close . More anti entertaining than anti hero | 2 |
An overall well-written story for a tv show with well-performed actors. However, I found my-self a bit confused several times while moving through the episodes as the story-line goes back and forth in time without giving enough evidence at which time each episode is based. For example let's say episode 1&2 are in the future time-line then episode 3 starts from the past without giving a clue that this is the case. It took me half-way through each episode to understand what was happening. This might be something the production could take a look at for the next season. | 7 |
At some point I fall asleep and woke up in a different scene. So I totally undersand what the protagonist feels like.
I think this is a narrative style which never tried publicly before. | 2 |
It's funny sad true and complicated, it's what's I want to watch forever. | 9 |
Season 2 and onwards clearly shows how the show could not produce a interesting and believable storyline without the book, which gives a bad name to the book as the series has just become a dreadful teen drama. Moreover, due to it becoming a dreadful teen drama, it has completely lost the message it was set out to convey. Now it has just become an unrealistic TV show that won't go down in history for any good reasons. | 5 |
I watched the first season, as far as I could tell Henry in the role of Geralt is Great , I can't imagine another role for Geralt. Some of the scenes had low specific effects that I thought could be much better. Those who have experienced The Witcher video game series will certainly enjoy This Series. | 8 |
I do respect the special effects in this movie and the design was cool, very remniscient of the game Oblivion: Shivering isles.
The acting was also decent.
To me just the dialogue, characters and the story as a whole bored me. It feels like they did not care about the writing process.
I'm somebody who pays a lot of attention to what is being said that made it hard for me to watch. It is not the entertaining kind of bad.
If you're somebody who likes movies like the hobbit, when the special effects are more important than the story than this is probably more up your ally, not my cup of tea. | 4 |
So I thought I'd write this review because of some bad scores on here. My wife and I love horror films and we watch a lot of them. Most are mediocre at best and don't really scare. The premise of this is simple but it's really well done, well acted, and has good suspense in it. You obviously need willing suspension of disbelief when watching horror and without that nearly all the genre falls flat, but go along for the ride and it's a great film with good suspense and some great scares in it.
It doesn't delve too deep into characters and gets into the action pretty quickly building to a good crescendo and doesn't give too much away as to which direction the film will go.
It's not the deepest watch you'll see or the most cerebral but it's not meant to be, it's a good straight forward dark horror. Sit back and enjoy! | 8 |
This is an average commercial movie disguised as a "psycho thriller", with a plot twist so predictable, that you will definitely see it coming within the 1st half hour. | 5 |
I didn't want to see this movie. The Black Panther character made zero impression on me during Captain America - Civil War. But like alot of people I watched it because the reviews were so positive.
Despite my reservations I went into this movie with an open mind. That mind was quickly bored beyond belief and frustrated at the predictable politically correct plot. Casting an entirely African American group is a hollow gesture when the storyline and dialogue is so stilted and pathetic.
If you take the novelty of the cast and some of the CGI out the rest of the movie is ALOT of talking about nonsense and some fight scenes. | 2 |
"Barbie" may seem like an improbable concept for a thought-provoking film, but director Greta Gerwig skillfully harnesses this cultural icon to deliver a potent and profound message. Gerwig delicately weaves a narrative that explores the complexities of gender dynamics without vilifying either gender, demonstrating that Kens in Barbieland face similar challenges as real-world women. The film also touches on the importance of embracing diversity and dismantling societal barriers. The movie's production design deserves applause, staying true to the beloved Barbie toys while ingeniously utilizing their features to propel the story forward. Margot Robbie delivers a phenomenal performance as Barbie, injecting depth and nuance into a character often dismissed as one-dimensional. Ryan Gosling, as Ken, complements the film with his adept portrayal, enhancing the chemistry between the characters, while America Ferrera's character brings a layer of relatability to the story. Gerwig's clever balance of humor and poignancy ensures that the movie achieves its goal of raising awareness without alienating its audience. A delightful yet meaningful cinematic experience. | 8 |
First of all, I wouldn't call it a murder mystery, one nice plot twist which was very creative and well executed but straight from the get go you pretty much know who it was.
The production and look of the movie was really great, nothing spectacular like the likes of avatar, but very good nevertheless. Personally for me, the performances lacked apart from the very convincing and standard great performance by Daniel Craig.
The first movie felt sincere, it had a rich story and fantastic all around, whereas this movie felt like Netflix just throwing money at a movie to make it massive, expensive and fun, which happened to work since it is the third largest movie to debut on Netflix
For me there was really nothing that stood out in this film, it was a fun family watch but definitely does not compare to the first. | 6 |
I'd consider myself a MCU fan, having seen all the movies (phase 1-3) and liking most of them, while loving some. This show sounded like an awesome way to explore the MCU in creative ways that have never been done before, and in the end they did mostly good but not great.
About half of the stories themselves are pretty uninteresting, and the humor is basically nonexistent and is pretty weak when present. Some of the episodes are just straight up bland: when I first watched the Captain Carter episode with my gf we were both like "eh, this show is not for us". Luckily some of the episodes were much better, but still, some were just as bad or worse. On the positives, this show has a unique animation style that I like, and the good stories are pretty cool! Doctor Strange's episode is one of the best, Infinity Ultron is great, and seeing zombies of your favorite characters will probably make you smile. All in all, a 5/10 because while it was more good than bad, I would probably never want to watch most of these episodes again since they just don't provide a memorable experience or one that leaves you wanting more: just kind of a bland taste in my mouth after watching. | 5 |
... That this show was so much fun to watch. Between the unique and diverse characters, the storyline, and the humor, The Umbrella Academy will keep you wanting more. Season 1 was better than Season 2 though - especially concerning Vanya's character. The humor, the banter, the character progression, and the diverse personalities are what makes the show interesting to me. Of course you have the mystery surrounding the show as well.
And no spoilers, but season 2 ended making us think we might be getting introduced to other special characters in the next season - at least I hope since we all know there are more out there (we find this out S1E1).
The rating could change but for now, The Umbrella Academy gets a 9/10. Even though S2 wasn't as much fun (for me) as S1 it was still a good season. And I was so invested in the characters from S1 it carried me through S2 even with the few bumps. Definitely will be a show I look forward to S3 release date. | 9 |
This show should have ended at Season one. The book was a story worth telling The continuation beyond the source material destroyed it. There's nothing good about this show after S1. | 2 |
It really struggled to keep my attention after episode 2. I was TOTALLY gripped in episode 1... and then it took a really boring turn in episode 3. Episode 4 was agony, People driving, traveling... looking around, meaningless shots of buildings, lakes. Clearly they were trying to stretch it out to 10 episodes when it should have been 5 or 6. | 4 |
I loved the 80's setting with evil Russians, classic rock music (the series' OST is awesome), D&D, monsters and mythos inspired by Lovecraft, King and Carpenter. The first season is 10/10 and honestly the series should've ended on season one. The following two seasons often felt rushed and too banal. The young actors are very talented, which is rare among kids actors, and play believable and complex characters. A must watch for any 80's horror movie fan. | 9 |
I immensely enjoyed some aspects of this show but other aspects really drug it down. For one, the sound quality is horrible. Some scenes I have to have the TV turned up all the way to even half understand what is being said but then suddenly and without warning everything gets much much louder. It was not a minor annoyance and gets this at least a full star lower rating. I suspect that they do this in an attempt to startle viewers, which is not acceptable considering I had to strain to hear some dialog. Another thing I did not like is the original music scoring, which came off like an '80s B movie soundtrack (think- the Halloween 3). I also found the fact that they could not get away from '90s through present scare tactics (scenes where they try to startle the viewer instead of doing something more subtle that might instill real fear in the viewers- this actually seems to be a lost art). I also feel that certain characters did things that were extremely unproductive in regards to successfully accomplishing anything. Over all I enjoyed this but am only giving it 5 stars because of how badly they messed up aspects that could have easily been fixed. | 5 |
The best tv show events photography acting and the story everything is a masterpiece I fell in love with the series and its details I recommend it. | 10 |
I have been eagerly waiting to see this film and the first impression after walking out of the theater was deception. The world of dreams is a world of opportunities to make a perfect film but too much dreams kill the dream. I find the locations of the filming a bit gray and as one of the characters said: why didn't they dream something sunny. As for the plot, since the beginning of the film you keep asking yourself is he dreaming this or not, which gives the movie another tone. Also I find the plot and the characters a bit gray as well as for their motives. But if you watch it as an action film you will be entertained. For me this film doesn't deserve to be in the top ten IMDb. | 7 |
The first 45 minutes of this movie is boring and then the rest isn't much better. Brad Pitt and Leonardo D caprio are good, but the script didn't give them much to work with. | 4 |
This movie isn't bad but it's not good. I didn't get my hopes up and I was still disappointed. The Director and Editor both did a pretty good job constructing and piecing the story together. However, the Director did not do a great job with the camera. . The actors did their best but again, The Director failed to use them in the right way. It also comes with a disjointed mix of politics and attempted clumsy messages.
Skip, wait for tv | 6 |
I have very low expectations and boi did it disappoint me. Except the Dr Strange episode nothing is good here. | 6 |
I feel nobody is smart in this movie. It is different from the crime movies that I have been watched. Normally, they usually have the main character who are smart and fight with bad people. I think the director tries to make the movie is funny by using stupid manner of characters. However, many scenes are cruel, especially the scene that the man kills the police, and many scenes are unpredictable; for example, the scene that kidnapper looks through the window and breaks it out and comes to the house to kidnap. In addition, there is an example of overlapping sound in the scene that the man tries to fix the television. In that scene while the man is fixing the television, the camera is zooming in, and when the television is good, the camera zoom out, but it becomes the different place. | 7 |
I think the title of the movie says it all. Cops were somewhat funny, other than that the movie overall was pretty boring despite good acting from everyone. | 4 |
I can only review the first 15 minutes. Thats how long I was able to watch this movie. I know, my own fault, I should have stayed home that night but curiosity won. Lots of muscles but no brains. | 3 |
The SeVen. When the Justice League is too busy, they'll have to do..... | 1 |
From the very first scene where you see most and hear the rest of the anti hero killing a neighbors cat, and then proudly laying out his body count of neighbor's animals and wild creatures, I was DISGUSTED with the show. However, since it had such a high rating, I prayed it was a isolated moment, and this was going to turn into a Dexter style show, AND AT LEAST see out the episode. But SADLY the writers didn't have HALF the chops that the writers on Dexter, and both of the main characters are infinitely unlikable! I continued to watch 4 episodes because they were only 20 minutes, and I figured you can't be fair in less than an hour...
Save yourself the horror of the atrocity they inflict with three animals, AND the bad writing/ acting! | 1 |
To be fair, Fallout isn't a bad film. It simply isn't as good as it's being made out to be. Plainly put, it's very boring, dull as dishwater, highly predictable and unoriginal.
It's a rehash of several of the previous films in the franchise and especially Ghost protocol in terms of plot. It's nothing a fan of the series hasn't seen before. Angela Bassett plays a CIA director who is eerily similar to her predecessor in Rogue Nation,. The action sequences give off a strong whiff of deja vu. I've seen similar if not identical ones in the James Bond franchise (Moonraker, Casino Royale, the Timothy Dalton and even Pierce Brosnan films among others), The Bourne trilogy and Godzilla (2014) even. When you get sick of action sequences and pinpoint the exact film you've seen it it, that's a problem. This movie, MI: Fallout, is a pastiche of other movies. It borrows heavily from other films and just pastes the parts together. I spent the bulk of the movie saying, "seen that in this movie and seen that in another." I was bored throughout the film.
The plot was very run-of-the-mill, one that we've seen in countless films i.e they team up to save the world from radical terrorists and miraculously succeed even though everything's so obvious and treads well-worn ground.
There are no interesting twists, you can see them from a mile away. Henry Cavill plays his character from The Man from U.N.C.L.E. except slightly and obviously different and even more boring. There wasn't any nuance to his performance. He reminds me of Sean Bean from Goldeneye except really snooze-worthy. Vanessa Kirby is wasted in this film!
The reason I love Rogue Nation is that it's incredibly fast-paced, fun and features a brilliant Rebecca Ferguson. She's great in this film but has practically nothing to do and even her character motivations are a rehash from the previous film. Benji and Luther who are always a delight are wasted in this film and I severely missed Jeremy Renner. There were problems with character development.
The plot aims at political relevance and emotional heft but that is it's downfall. We've seen this story before and the themes are so poorly and minimally handled. Every villain is so ridiculously cookie-cutter and cliche. It all reminded me of the Robert Langdon films based on the works of Dan Brown. I didn't see the point of bringing back Michelle Monaghan except for emotional manipulation which didn't even materialize. It was obvious she was brought back to close her chapter with Ethan so he can focus on Ilsa in the next installment. The sentimentality felt forced and cheesy.
In addition the film lags for a huge part of it's runtime,. It's too long and on overall I was extremely underwhelmed. | 6 |
One of the most boring series ever. It could have been done in one season. All the wine pouring, close ups of snails, blood, violence, pseudo-intellectual conversations...just ridiculous. | 2 |
QT has lost his way...what a disjointed mess. The great actors were great but it lacked cohesion...even in the QT way. Great cinematography of course...but overall it was almost boring. Best character was Cliff's dog! | 2 |
The movie starts great, but goes off the rails soon after. Had they kept the look and feel of the first 30 minutes, this movie could've been great.
For positives, the cast is great in general. Margot Robbie and Ryan Gosling do a great job as "Stereotypical Barbie" and Ken. Barbieland also looks vividly colorful and full of references to the toys themselves anyone who played with Barbie toys will recognize.
For negatives, It is not a fun movie at its core. The movie pits women against men and it has a negative and political messaging. It's a "lecturing feminist" and "bring down the patriarchy" kind of movie. I wasn't expecting it to turn out this way from the trailers and was honestly surprised by it.
In general, if you're looking for a lighthearted movie about Barbies (and Kens) where you can kick back, relax and have some laughs, this movie is not it. | 5 |
As a reader of "Good Omens" the book I really looked forward to this Amazon Prime production. Usually Neil Gaiman adaptations (and Terry Prachett, the co-author) are much better, well, adapted. This "Good Omens" TV series lacks adequate production values, casting choice, script treatment (pacing, matters of plot including setup, climax, resolution) as well as overall entertainment. While I did basically dedicate myself to watching the entire series rather than fully enjoying it, I did find areas of real promise and that type of Gaiman fantasy horror and philosophical acceptance and Prachett whimsy for this series to be not entirely disappointing. I would say this series is hit and miss, but overall acceptable despite a cringe factor in how sometimes overly politically correct (gay! Asian! Black!) the series is and specifically annoying to me, how similar lead actors David Tennant and Martin Sheen look. I know there was a point in them looking alike, but it was just too on the nose for me. I really wish this series was better, and I'm so annoyed it's not, but for what it is and the themes it has and the story devices the authors have laid within it, this series is still better at heart than most. So 7/10.
Btw I get the type of look they were going for with the cheap special effects, a type of low budget 80s/90s look a la Neil Gaiman's "Neverwhere" screenplay production, but they were just too inconsistent with it so everything seemed piecemeal and I just didn't appreciate the follow through rather than the actual idea of it. For me the effect was "cheap" rather than "tongue in cheek." Incidentally "Neverwhere" is a series you should look into because Gaiman wrote it for screenplay before writing his book, "Neverwhere." Low budget, but much more effective.I
P.S. The 9 and 10 star reviews are really obvious and they suck. Also what's with the downvoting of 6, 7 and 8 star reviews? | 7 |
Whigham is really really bad. Electra's casting almost killed Daredevil s02, and they did the same thing here. She is out of place in every scene. | 5 |
The actors in the show are good in their roles but unfortunately the bad directing and poor writing really drag this show down. The show is boring and I didn't find much excitement or much of anything to enjoy in this. Often times it was confusing and has odd creative choices, over all an uninteresting story which became a chore to watch. With the right creative team behind it, this could have been a great show. Definitely down at the bottom when it comes to the MCU. | 4 |
This is my favourite show. But the last episodes happened to have a different ending than the others. Hoping that the new episodes will be better. | 9 |
So much darker episode 1. Its almost a horror this first episode, to much for me. But well done for keeping it fresh every season.
Can't wait to wath episode 2. | 8 |
Like "The Girl on the Train" and any Dan Brown book exactly what makes Ernst Cline's novel excellent makes for a just decent cinematic experience. The novel engages in dense and luxurious world-building and an intricate puzzle-box plot which unfolds degree-by-degree. By necessity of their compressed run-times, movies need to get through the set up (unless you are M. Night Shyalaman whose films constitute mostly setup). The medium limits the plot points to only a few switchbacks (again unless you are M. Night Shyalaman and you put all your switchbacks into a one big reveal). The limitations present headwinds that Spielberg takes a mighty swing at slipping but with limited success. The film's key draw, as you would expect, come from Spielberg's immersive and imaginative visuals and not from the rushed plot or flat performances. The motion picture also provides nostalgic value to those of a certain age through dozens of visual references ("there's 'Bigfoot', the king of the monster trucks back in the 80s!"). In short, to misquote the immortal words of the Gin Blossoms, if you don't expect too much, you might not be let down". | 6 |
The only thing that got me through the movie was Ryan Reynolds. | 2 |
I know we are only 2 episodes in but god its boring and very disappointing. Hopefully it gets better. Its just feels like a rip off of Bewitched. | 1 |
I have rewatched this series multiple times over the years. Anytime I want something light hearted kind of place holder content to play in the background, this is the show I put on. It is so very wholesome and nice. While most wholesome shows have no long term thread. It is the very same thing each time. This show especially for kids is great with all the travelling and adventures. The way they built a culture around each nation was truly incredible. The bending while never really consistent in strength. It is great, and thrilling. The lessons the show teaches are so much better than what is in today's kid shows. Especially everything Iroh says, He is so wise. As a kid he taught me so much about how to behave and tolerance of everyone. | 10 |
Umbrella academy is actually a very good series but in my opinion season 2 is not as good as season 1. I hope season 3 is more interesting than before. btw my favorite is number 5 because he has the power I want | 8 |
Might be good movie if you make cyericters more dull and borink.
I admit that I am a big fan of "The Americans" but Philip and Elizabeth are real people.
Ees not good film. | 6 |
I've never been a fan of "multiverse" movies and superhero movies, and this Oscar winning movie did nothing to convert me. If anything, it confirmed why I despise those movies so much. A simple story of an angry young woman trying to get her mother to approve of her and her lifestyle. That's the plot, but it takes the audience on this surreal journey that includes giant bagels and fingers turned into hot dogs. At one point I thought I was watching the Monkees' movie "Head" again, which runs circles around this movie (and "Head" was not exactly a great movie). Jamie Lee Curtis, after a career of playing Laurie Strode at least 8 times, and the occasional comedy, drama, and action flick, won an Oscar for what must be her worst performance (and I've seen "Perfect.") And to add to that, Michelle Yeough wins Best Actress? For this thing? (She deserved it for Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon). I forced myself to watch the whole thing but it was agonizing. A movie that makes me want to stop going to the theater for at least a few years. | 3 |
As always, don't listen to the critics and take a look for yourself. This movie is funny, adrenalinic, great views and action scenes. All the characters are fun and relatable. The product placement scenes are a bit cheesy but what the hell, who cares. Hope they do a sequel to see some more from the past lives of the 6. | 7 |
Directed by Danny and Michael Philippou. Co-written by Danny Philippou. A runtime of one hour and thirty-five minutes. With an R rating.
In Australia, a group of teenagers stumbles on the weirdest thing. What looks like a sculpture of a single arm with an open hand. This hand gets given to "Joss" played by Chris Alosio. "Joss" and his friend "Hayley" played by Zoe Terakes are the cool kids you could say at school. They use this hand as a party trick.
See what I didn't tell you is when you grab this hand and repeat the words "talk to me" you get a connection with a spirit. Then when you utter the sentence "let me in" you let the spirit take over your body. The goal is to never go over a couple of minutes with the spirit inside of you. They're grave consequences if you do.
"Jade" played by Alexandra Jensen, her best friend "Mia" played by Sophie Wade, "Sophie's" boyfriend "Daniel" played by Otis Dhanji and even her younger brother "Riley" played by Joe Bird are all witnesses to this hand's supernatural connection.
After the initial scare of seeing a dead spirit in front of you when you first grab the hand and say those words, give you a rush like no other. After "Sophie's" mother "Sue" played by Miranda Otto goes to work.
"Sophie" trying to fit in invites "Hayley", "Joss" and her small inner circle to have a supernatural party of sorts. They will all find out the consequences of holding the hand too long. As well as what happens when you try to play with spirits because all of them aren't good. In this eerie supernatural film.
The "Talk to Me" trailer was scarier than that actual film. I thought this was a possession film at first but it was a little more than that. Like who has fun letting spirits/demons take over their body? That doesn't sound like fun at all. I have family in Australia I will be calling them to ask them about these weird tendencies.
I found the film creepy and weird more than scary. Like you see these spirits making you do the oddest things and you want more. On top of that, an observation is if you have some messed up stuff that happened in your life you should probably stay clear away from something like this.
The fact certain characters couldn't put two and two together to see the obvious issues annoyed me. Even if you're seeing a family member, they didn't look or sound that odd before their passing. Why would they portray something demonic now? Hmmm here's a guess maybe because they are.
Between the multiple weird scenes. The ending felt rushed and half-heartily explained. The very end was cool giving you an OH SNAP moment but the directors could have transitioned that way better. Because the film didn't cost much and it's making a ton of money. A sequel was recently approved.
The concept as a whole and the very end of the film could make for a good sequel. There are ingredients in this to do it. The question is will they though? I guess that will be left to be seen. I give this film three mor fires 🔥🔥🔥.
#CosmoandtheMovieWithin #CosmoMovieBlog #CosmoLanier #TalkToMe. | 6 |
Shitty movie. Honestly, after the first 20 minutes, I had to turn if off. Really? Killing a dog? Was that necessary? Also, it hurt my ears to hear the TERRIBLE Russian being spoken by the "bad dudes", and the guys who play the gang members aren't even Russian for god sakes. And as a Russian, I gotta say I am also incredibly sick of Hollywood literally ALWAYS using Russians as the "bad guys". Change it up for once. Keanu Reeves has played the same character- even if different movies- for the last several years. Blah blah, revenge, ex-hit-man, blah blah, good guy versus bad guys, blah blah blah. Hollywood movies these days are all identical and lack originality. Save your time and watch something older, like an action movie from the 80s and 90s. | 2 |
There is a dish in South East Asian countries called the 'rojak'; a mix of sliced greens, fried fritters, squid and eggs and topped with a thick peanut gravy. It doesn't sound particularly promising, looks much worse but locals justifiably pick their plates clean every time. This much can be said of Stephen Chow's erstwhile effort, the dodgy cornball humour of "Shaolin Soccer", and now, the chowster is back for another dose of shenanigans with "Kung Fu Hustle", already a huge hit in this region. Just like the 'rojak', Hong Kong cinema and movies like KungFu Hustle would never be mistaken for high art, with subtlety thrown further out the window than the protagonists are during the action sequences, and slapstick jarringly pitched at hysterical levels wedged in between dramatic sequences. There is a feeble plot about finding one's true self and being the "chosen one" as the denizens of a local town must fight against the powerful Axes gangsters, but one can't seriously discuss narrative possibilities when the lead in the film uses such gifts as the "hurricane power palm blow" (it's a kung fu move diametrically opposed to David Carradines "exploding palm" technique in Kill Bill; one strike and a 50 foot palm print appears on the side of buildings. You get the drift).
Stephen Chow is already a veteran in his native Hong Kong, where he first started out in collaboration with or in imitation of that other master of lowbrow humour, Wong Jing. One dimensional caricatures feature prominently in these movies, and Chow puts on the same deadpan expression and parochial cantonese drone in literally dozens of (best-selling) films. It is nice to see him maturing somewhat, just like Tom Hanks did; currently, Chow is already a reliable male lead in dramatic roles, not that his role in KungFu hustle would stretch any reasonably seasoned thespian.
It is interesting to note the role slapstick in Hong Kong films; it is similar to the recitativo in Italian opera, and the singing sequences in Bollywood films. They are interludes in the narrative designed to play to the audiences, which says a lot about audience tastes. Western viewers not familiar with Hong Kong cinema have generally been perplexed, but those of us in the know take it with a groan and quickly wait for the next kung fu sequence. There are, however, several laugh out loud slapstick sequences in Kung Fu Hustle that comes as a nice surprise (the surprise being that it was actually funny, and reasonably inoffensive).
The action choreography is first rate, the special effects are hugely imaginative, all in all the technical credits are above par for a Hong Kong film.
The references to the Matrix are courtesy of great wire-kung fu fights choreographed by the inestimable Yuen Wo Ping. But it is the less obvious references to Terry Gilliam's "the adventures of Baron Munchausen" that truly bring a chuckle. One of the characters is as fleet of feet as Berthold, while the ending is a nice touch: a small boy leads a girl by hand towards a movie theatre, and on the streets, a peddler sells a series of kung fu adventure comics to another urchin. As most young Asian boys will know, a kung fu comic promises fantastical adventures on the cheap, very much in the spirit of this often low brow but nonetheless exuberant movie. Just like the Baron on his horse at the end of "adventures", Chow seems to wink: It's silly but fun, hope you enjoyed the show! And yes, I did. | 7 |
Total waste of time..
Pointless Senseless Unentertaining Graphical (unnecessarily) Wasted potential
Netflix misses the mark once more | 2 |
Amsterdam stars a cast filled with recognizable names, with a main 3 of Christian Bale, Margot Robbie and John David Washington. The movie struggles to find most of what it's good at in its first half, the movie has a persisting battle of seriousness and comedy through most of the 2+ hour run length. Some of the humor does land, but the movie succeeds better at being a more serious drama with elements of comedy sprinkled into it over a comedy with small segments of a competent story. The pacing of the actual film is sometimes messy and the tone of the movie also shifts frequently. That being said the actual acting for the most part was good and the characters had depth to them. The cinematography of the movie is beautiful and there isn't a dull moment visually through the entire movie. Amsterdam seems to get the whole film straight in the last half and makes the movie worth your time. It's an enjoyable cinematic adventure that's worth your time. | 7 |
I kept watching hoping it would get better, it didn't. If you start watching this show with the mindset that it is just silly then you will not be dissapointed. This show has a lot of potential, I think stretching it to 6 episodes actually crippled it by stretching out content and storylines that didn't add to the show. 4 Episodes would have been great.
I enjoyed the shows' interpretation of religious doctrine and philosophies. I think both Michael Sheen and David Tennant were excellent in their respective roles. It took me until episode 6 to make the connection with David Tennant's name "Crowley" and that he began as a snake. Very clever. Favorite part of the show is Crowley's car and blasting Queen's greatest hits. | 7 |
I mean, I get the girl-empowerment thing that this movie is trying to push. But, srsly guys, this movie is barely average. The acting is passable, the plot is not all that interesting, there are some major continuity errors and character inconsistencies that I spotted just on my first screening and all in all there is not so much going on. The last words of the movie left me face palming hard, since Diana is speaking to us like a schoolgirl would. It's not a really bad movie either - the effects are great except for when the film is not trying to impress us too much. There are parts that feel rather silly, like a comic book - AND THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN A GREAT THING, except 98% of the film does not feel like a comic book! You have these over the top awesome moments that have you gaping at the screen and, on their own are amazing, but they have nothing to do with the flow and feeling of the rest of the film. It could have been worse. Much worse. Oh, and one last thing - Why does Diana fall in love with the very first "above average- man she ever sees? What is she, like, a Disney princess? Is it 1995 and we have Pocahontas all over again? Ugh... | 5 |
Just simply riveting TV and the dialogue/events are very believable.
It's got snippets of the greatness that True Detective S1 had but not quite. It goes a little too off tracks into random things that don't feel organic.
Plus there was little plothoIe I found jarring.
Other than that, it's hard to argue this isn't too-notch TV. Well worth watching. | 8 |
Please don't watch it. It's such a wastage of time. Even the acting isn't good. The story is written by some confused person. I won't recommend it even if it's 5he last series on Netflix. Ok bye. Sorry. | 1 |
Back in 1971 when Peter Bogdonavich released The Last Picture Show it received mostly rave reviews. One of the few dissenting opinions was the late critic John SImon who said it was a patchwork of other directors shots-a Hitchcock shot here and a Ford scene there, etc. I am reminded of this when I first watched Stranger Things seasons 1-3. The obvious influence is Stephen King whose fingerprints would seem to be all over it, though I know he was not involved. The boys banding together, the evil government agency holding a little girl because of her "powers", an absentee Dad and even the nose bleeds El has when she uses her power are right out of Firestarter. There are also allusions to John Carpenter (especially his film "The Thing") and Steven Spielberg. In the season 2 there has also been scenes lifted right out of The Exorcist and in season 3 The Terminator. This not to say that the show isn't entertaining. It's a lot of fun and keeps your attention going from episode to episode. The acting is uniformly good-nice to see Winona Ryder back , same with Paul Reiser. Special effects are very good too. I watched it as a guilty pleasure and just to see how many movie influences I could name. | 7 |
Many American movies have tried very hard to show teens and children are being dumb, mean and dangerous, but none hold a candle to this Aussie flick.
The main character is the most disgusting creature I've seen in a while: one of those people who consider themselves good and even righteous, cool and positive, while destroying everything around them. People like these are one of the most terrifying things in the world and that is why Talk to Me was extremely disturbing. And it's not just Mia. Almost all of the teen characters in the film show a level of selfishness and lack of awareness that is more scary than any ghost.
Speaking of the ghosts... it's not very clear what they wanted. You get the standard dead corpse evil demon possession, but like so many other movies, they don't explain why they would be like that or what drives them. As mere McGuffins, therefore, they are uninteresting.
Bottom line: after watching this film, talking to dead people was the thing least on my mind. Instead I was quickly cataloguing everybody I know, including myself, for signs of Mia-ness. This film was scary for all the wrong reasons. | 7 |
This movie looks great that is true, it looks wonderful oh yes, showing off extensive CGI of space, oh yes its "revolutionary"! ... Hold on. No. It isn't.
The movie does look great and I feel like most people are giving it huge praise for that, praise maybe rightfully deserved. However the minute anyone calls this new or revolutionary, is about the time anyone who doesn't plaster all their expectations and enjoyment solely on visuals should stop listening.
I'm a huge fan of sci-fi and space, I wanted to enjoy this movie, though I questioned the over-hyped cast and shameless showcasing of CGI I went into it with an open mind. But it wasn't long until I discovered a lot of what I originally expected, something I like to call "Avatar- syndrome". Referring to a film that distracts people with lovely effects and visuals, which cover-up a pi**-poor story full of clichés laden with cheesiness. Take away the great effects and everyone would notice what this movie is; bad. Just bad. Predictable, characters lacking anything unique whatsoever- Sandra Bullock is the rookie that messes up to unbelievable lengths, which adds another element to the movie, just how unrealistic it is that a person as incompetent as that would get anywhere near the space program. And of course George Clooney playing the same character he is cast as 90% of the time: a care-free hot-shot lady's-man who always knows what hes doing.
Its unimaginative and is just a survival-disaster movie. Also moving on to how this movie is supposedly "revolutionary". Am I missing something? We've known how to showcase space in movies since the 60s. "2001: A Space Odyssey" Ever heard of that? Or how bout "Alien"? Do I have to bring in "Star Wars"? I understand this is different technology that we're talking about, but really? It's unimpressive and it pushes the dogma that extensive CG can distract audiences from a lazily written, garbage plot.
Looks good, but is unimpressive, predictable, and cliché as all hell. | 3 |
I saw the movie and thought it will have here a rating somewhere near 5.
And then i see a TOP250 rating!!!
Did you (who voted this so high) see the same movie as I?!
Let me list just some stupid things about this "masterpiece":
MJ (how can someone in serious movies even call someone like this!!??) Mary Jane Watson (LOL) and her love story is one of the most stupid things filmed.She doesn't even know in whom she is in love with.She nearly marries someone;but she is far away from loving him.And then all this "surprising twists" in this love story.That was really too cheap. And shall i write something about the famous scene (where she leaves the church, the sun is shining, the music is playing...)?! Better I don't.
Or what about about Peters Aunt. And the scene where she hangs on an umbrella.That was more stupid than words can say.
Or the great special effects? Some praise them. Hm; saw the same in the first part. Saw much better in X2 (which is a REAL movie with a REAL story).
But OK, these are just stupid pieces of the whole movie. My most important point,and i can't understand the others didn't notice that. It is the completely stupid mixture what this movie is. We have some really stupid scenes (mentioned above).Then we have some scenes which try to show us the big emotions from movies for grown people (when Peter tells his aunt he could have saved his uncle).And then she walks slowly and quiet away (it tries to be great emotional cinema; but IMO this reaction was completely unrealistic; especially when they meat the next time!).Or when we see she hasn't enough money and mas to move to another apartment. But on the other side there are such stupid moments in here(umbrella...) That doesn't work out; it doesn't fit; it is wrong. At least it felt so to me. I made me go "oh oh" !
And there is even more of this "mixing". There is even more comedy (the newspaper scenes), but there are also some horror elements (doc oc - LOL, another stupid name in this movie).
At all: this was much more a comic as it was a movie. If it would focus on a more serious or on a more funny story...both would have be OK. But this?! No, that was anything else but OK. As the first part was!
My rating: 4/10 | 4 |
A great little film written and directed by Steven Soderbergh. In fact this was his first film which garnered him an Oscar nomination for the screenplay. Now, if you are into action movies or need to have lots of excitement on the screen this film probably is not for you. It is dialogue-driven and certainly about the characters on the screen. In fact the first 10 minutes of the film I was not into it and was questioning if I should just skip the film entirely. I stuck through it though and am glad I did.
It's the story of a hubby John (Peter Gallagher) who spends his day working as a lawyer. When not in the office he is cheating on his wife Ann (great performance by Andie MacDowell) with her sister Cynthia (Laura San Giacomo). An old friend of John's named Graham (wonderful performance by James Spader) comes to town. I could see it coming about 1,000 miles away by Ann and Graham start a relationship together that blossoms, I don't want to give too much away but along the way she like us the viewer she learns more about Graham and the videotapes that he has and what exactly is on them.
I am really glad I watched this film and will need to view ti again, but it may be one of those love it or hate it type of movies. | 8 |
Avatar 2 is a film that really had no need to be made. The story of the first one was already cliche enough but had a reasonable endpoint. Here, A2 basically repeats the plot of the first one, and retcons some of the more important things of that film.
At some level, if this were the historiagraphy of a true series of events, I could see the plot here being a reasonable next step. However, from a creative perspective, it is sorely lacking. It feels as if certain actors were contracted for a trilogy, but then circumstances had to be cleverly written to keep including them despite critical endpoints. It feels a bit cheap. Likewise, since the story is itself a rehash of the first movie, it doesn't feel particularly thoughtful. The major action sequence focuses around a moralistic tale from our own history, but is mainly set to tug at your heartstrings in a variety of ways that never really succeed.
Probably the biggest misstep here is that the Reef People are not really explored from a cultural perspective. They are shown as having physical adaptations to undersea life, but at the same time speak the same language and have largely the same culture as the Forest People. This makes no sense, and also removes an obvious opportunity to explore inter-group relations among Indigenous peoples. There is never a suggestion that these peoples have any prior history up to this point, which is odd. It all fits into a 'Indigenous Good, Colonizer Bad' mentality- that isn't necessarily wrong, but it is patronizing at the same time.
I did enjoy watching the spectacle. The CGI here is miles better than most of its contemporaries, which feels strange to say when we are 30 years after Jurassic Park. The world and the animations here at least look real, which is more than I can say for many current films that over-rely on CGI. | 4 |
This is one of the worst movies I've ever seen. The costumes are completely unrealistic given the supposed time frame, sceneries is very good.. but unbelievable for the story.. costume is completely let off to the story...funny part is they ware shoes with beautifully stitched jackets and stitched clothes... in one scene the character even ties dog-wolf's face with shoe lace ..lol....crazey funny rich illitrate guy's costume designing project....... | 3 |
Terrible and unfunny. I don't really get why this guy is allowed to direct movies. | 1 |
I'll not call it overhyped or something but this movie is like a whole some of everything the acts make you ahte someone laugh at some fantasize and even love a mixture of everything. | 10 |
The director seems to have an unhealthy fascination with blood and gore which was unnecessary for this series. It really was unfortunate could have been a brilliant series otherwise. | 5 |
I must admit I struggle with how to put this show into context and that will not only be punchy but summarise just how wonderful an amazing show really is... It's one of those shows where everything is right and not only right but magical and sucks you right in,the characters, the stories, the animation, the music... ohh the music... it can bring a grown man to cry, it's one of those shows where it's done so right you even love the bad guys and to be honest it's just a 10/10 show and I'm devastated there's not more. | 10 |
Great action.
All these are shown in trailers so I'm not giving anything away!
Black Panther's car chase has flawless CGI.
Bucky grabs a motorcycle and flips it around in motion.
Spiderman's fanboy is pretty funny. Great actor pick for Spidey.
Personal touches between the characters is a great break in the action.
Another director could have allowed the movie to drag over the 2 1/2 hour behemoth. Never drags, great throughout. Moves along great.
Of course the action and pace accelerates in the 3rd act and is great!
It's a toss up between Avengers and Cap 3 on which is the best. Avengers probably edges out because it was the first group movie that really worked. Sorry X-men.
You'll definitely enjoy it on the big screen and later at home. Saw it in 3D but would also be great in 2D.
Sorry Batman v Superman lovers. I saw it and it's not as good. Saw Batman v Superman in 3D too.
Enjoy and have fun! | 9 |
Glad I waited to watch this on an already paid for subscription online.
This movie showed so much promise and I found myself laughing at the frivolous attempts at pretending to understand physics. They could have used Science Fiction to the full extent of the unknown and blown the effects out of the water, but rather, they used half-witted science to try and make the concepts realistic.
The other half of the movie I was laughing at the sad attempt to establish some sentimental relationship between characters. All too often relationships were summarized in a poor attempt at back fill.
The beginning of the movie was confusing and near the end of the movie I found myself playing with my dog rather than even trying to watch.
Don't get your hopes up. | 3 |
Great story line backed by brilliant direction & acting. Goosebumps guaranteed. A MUST WATCH! | 10 |
Nothing about this was entertaining nor was there anything to hold your interest or to invest in any of the characters. Facile and superficial nonsense. Much the same as the original 'knives out'. It's not clear who is to benefit from this production, I can't see any of the cast really being amused by being in it, suppose you get paid no matter how much of a turkey you star in. If you like some of the stars you would no doubt be interested in seeing how they perform, but an embarrassingly simple story with nothing to recommend it leaves this some way from a Netflix box office success. The emperors new clothes I'm afraid. | 3 |
Cannot hold a candle to the acting or storyline of the superb but under appreciated "the Killing". Do not understand the fanfare for this show. No matter how much i have admired Kate Winslet in her past performances, this is not her best by a long shot. Maybe bad direction? Very unbelievable storyline with major plot holes. | 4 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.