Review
stringlengths 6
10.3k
| Rating
int64 1
10
|
|---|---|
We couldn't wait for the movie then our local theater decided not to show it when it first came out. Then a few weeks later they added it. We were thrilled until we saw it and we both thought it sucked. I rated it 3/10 but should be more like a 2/10. A waste of our time. I really don't know how all of you are giving it a high rating. | 3 |
Good picture, no story, a product placement in every 2 minutes. Hard to call a movie. | 5 |
The music is the only good thing - turn off the music and the movie is an empty black hole. | 2 |
I am late to the party but binge watching on Labor Day weekend. 4 stars for the bells and whistles.
I watched the premiere of Lost in Space when I was a kid in the 60's. That was back when we had four channels and it was shown at the same time as the original Star Trek (sneaky network execs!). The original was "science-y" in its first few episodes, but soon incorporated humor and then camp. It was goofy but fun.
This one is harrowing, so far. I'm just starting, so I hope some humor or light-heartedness is coming. Based on the other reviews, though, I'm not sure.
The best moment so far was the Billy Mumy cameo in Episode 1. | 4 |
Gravity is one of these rare movies I thought there must be a 2nd version out there in cinema. A version which is visually that impactful, tense and simply that amazing everybody keeps saying. But no, it's not. There's no OMG at any point of the endless floating and heavy breathing. no thrill nothing memorable for me... just a black sea of nothing. I guess I'll take my beloved one and a picknick blanket and make myself comfortable under the actual sky. | 1 |
Actors were OK, the elaborate story was just ....meh For me, the film would have worked if the "magic" wasn't so ridiculously unbelievable. There is just too many tricks that happen which are just so outlandish that you will facepalm so much that you will have an aneurysm. I don't know what is worse - the actual magic or the explanation from Thadeus (M Freeman) which is just as bad The film was entertaining to a point. It was fast paced and fun in some parts and I would have given perhaps given it a higher score if I was 15 years old and enjoyed seeing a guy use playing cards as weapons. | 5 |
The chemistry between Hill and his mates as they try to buy booze to impress some girls reminded me so much of the old days being young when all the stupid stuff didn't matter but you thought it did. The cops who allow mclovin on for the ride along are absolutley brilliant. Well well well worth a watch! | 10 |
No double A (Adam and Aniston) can save this movie.. I'm a big fan of AS and JA but there's a line between good and bad movie.. Where do I sign up? | 1 |
I think I have figured how Iron Man 3 got a 7.5+ rating this early in the release process. I think many Tony Stark / Iron Man series fans went to the movie (as did I) with a strong predilection to like the movie (as did I). I was ready and excited for a great flick.
Sadly at around 38 minutes into the movie, I found myself checking my watch again to see if I shouldn't have seen enough that it would start making sense. I would find myself checking my watch many times after that, wondering when this movie was going to be over. I am sad to report that this episode is tragically long.
I've loved this Iron Man series (some better than others). But now, this current Iron Man 3 element seems to be part of the series only in that you recognize some of the gear, mostly suits that work poorly or not at all and of course we all recognize Pepper and Tony Stark.
And if you've seen none of the previous movies in the series, I suspect you will be completely lost. What is with all these unexplained round light sources in the chest and hands of Stark and the gear? Admittedly it would be very difficult to explain all of that without showing all the previous releases but just a heads up to those getting into the series late; save your money.
I am still sitting here bewildered by how this movie got released. I am still sad I find myself writing a negative review for anything "Iron Man" related. Honestly, I'm not sure why I even gave it a three star. Memories perhaps. | 3 |
After the first hour (or so) the movie improves into the elite level of the original, only with a more complex story, full of twists and turns and complications, filled with as intense and gripping moments, and full of Pacino and De Niro's impossibly great acting.
But the first hour is a bit boring setting the table for what was about to happen, and with some really long sequences here and there after that, the more than three hours are a bit much. The ending is superb. | 10 |
Alpacino is the one who really diserved the Oscar, not Robert Deniro | 9 |
A highly successful lawyer Dave Lockwood (Jason Bateman) on the verge of making partner after closing a key merger deal reluctantly agrees to go watch a game with his childhood buddy Mitch Planko (Ryan Reynolds), school dropout and up-and-coming light porn actor. Now following separate path one leads a family life alongside Jamie (Leslie Mann) and a trio of dastardly children (including demonic baby twins and a bum-whooping ballerina). Meanwhile Mitch fails to follow through on anything in his life - the eternal quitter now entertaining women through the easiest job possible. After the drunken night both of them declare their admiration of the other's life while peeing into a fountain presided over by a stony statue of the Greek goddess Metis. The following morning - it's "Freaky Friday" on crack...
Inexplicably construed around a vulgarly obscene script lacking any of the gutsy wisecracking charm of "Role Models", but all of the toilet humour prevalent in the lowest grade comedies. Unmistakenly and fortunately R-rated it features tirades of miscued crassness with scenes of poop farting munchkins, extremely irresponsible parenting and unimaginative build-up. As if led by the misguided belief that funny equals farts and profane language the real laughs are scarce both in quantity as well as quality. The main benefit of "The Change Up" derives from the undeniable lure of Bateman and Reynolds forced to play against character and the awkwardness it entails. This unequivocally does lead to some endearing scenes shouldered on the characters allure and a well-deserved conclusion, but the overall lewdness over laughs dilutes any real viewing satisfaction. | 3 |
THis movie is an example of where Hollywood can use it's influence through award shows to give a movie that deserves no recognition and was not popular in theaters a way to make money on DVD. Give someone in it an award and advertise advertise advertise until people think they heard it was good. I stood in blockbuster with three other people whom were as clueless as I was. All we knew is it was advertised an award winner and was never in to rent. We also knew no one could tell us how it was. If you are going to buy or rent a movie don't make it this one. It is a movie about nothing in Japan. Only problem is it is no Seinfeld and no good. If you rent/buy this movie you will do as I did. I waited and waited ... and waited for it to get good and it never did. Please take my advise and don't fall into the oh it's artistic give it a shot. It is not artistic it is a waste of time and two hours I will never get back in my life. | 1 |
I'm waiting for the next season And by the way superhero is always superhero. | 7 |
The new Jennifer Lawrence spy thriller RED SPARROW is being advertised as a "sexy" thriller, and if you watch the trailers for it, you would think it was a Jason Bourne/Mission Impossible-type of action thriller - with "sexy" action - and you would be misled and disappointed.
For, RED SPARROW, is a sexy, intelligent, inner-workings, "out-smart-the-other-guy" type of spy thriller in more of the mode of a John LeCarre novel (like TINKER, TAILOR, SOLIDER, SPY). It does have some action and some GRAPHIC torture scenes, but I would not classify it as an action film, so those looking for that will be bored.
RED SPARROW follows the tale of Bolshoi Ballet Prima Ballerina, Dominika Egorova (Jennifer Lawrence) who, after an accident ends her ballet career, is drawn into the deadly world of International Intelligence by her Uncle and must her her body as well as her mind to survive.
This is billed - and shot - as a "sexy" thriller with "SEXY" being the primary driving force - and that is too bad, for I found the sex and nudity to be gratuitous and didn't really drive the narrative forward. When the film stopped focusing on this aspect and focused on the mystery - and misdirection - at hand and Dominika's ability to outsmart and outhink those around her, that the film really catches it's footing and is quite good.
Unfortunately, you have to sit through the first 1/2 of this film - the training portion - and that is filled with gratuitous sex and sexual conquest and using your sex to disarm the enemy. It's an unfortunate choice that almost took me out of the movie, so when the (really) good second half of the film came about, I was surprised by it.
But if you can get through that, you'll be rewarded by a pretty good, pretty smart, pretty INTELLIGENT thriller.
Letter Grade: B (C for the 1st half, A for the 2nd half)
7 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis) | 7 |
There are a lot of movies I've watched this year, but Captain America: The Winter Soldier is, undoubtedly the best I have seen not only in this year, in a long time. The most I liked from this one was the hand-to- hand combat. It was because the fights scenes are so well done, with a great choreography behind them. Special effects are amazing, see it and you will realize that everything in this movie looks realistic.
Chris Evans does a great job as Captain America, I just hope he won't be replaced for the next movie. Sebastian Stan, Scarlett Johanson and Samuel .L. Jackson were so good at their roles. With this, Marvel has demonstrated that they have a lot more to show and I can't wait to see The Avengers: Age of Ultron. I'd say that Captain America is now my favourite superhero after seeing this.
Don't miss it. This is a must watch!
10/10. | 9 |
I started binge watching and loved the entire series. The graphics also seems to have improved in the later parts. | 9 |
To be frank, I watched this movie with absolutely no real expectations. I thought maybe it would be fun watching some really stupid movie that weekend and how pleasantly surprised I was! I really can't remember any teen movie, if may so call it, which has been so very touching and true! Most teen movies are like over the top comedies, but not this one though.
Jonah Hill and Michael Cera are absolutely awesome as two fun loving Americans about to graduate. And Christopher Mintz just adds to the hilarious factor of the movie.
The performances by all the actors are quite good and although the movie just about loses it in the middle, but in the end it just ends superbly. And most importantly, the comedy is absolutely bang on! All in all, a fun movie to watch with your friends and will leave you wanting for a bit more in the end! Worth a watch. | 9 |
Nothing against Adam and I liked his seriousness. I just got really bored and didn't really vibe with what was happening in the movie. Jmo. | 2 |
In complete opposite mentality of Taxi Driver, no one challenges things anymore. If a movie wins a few Oscars and is labeled as a "classic", the title sticks and everyone must bow down to it. If someone challenges this titleeven so much as asks, "Why is it a classic?"they're ironically turned into a laughable fool by fools laughing. The paradoxical problem with this is that no one can really defend the so-called classics. All you ever hear in the defense of films like Taxi Driver when criticism arises is a list of the film's awards, or a list of the film's critical acclaim, or just, "It's a classic, so shut up!" There have been far more original, thought-provoking, well-made movies that never even get the public's attention, much less won overrated Oscars. When people challenge the so-called classics with this fact, the notion is never entertained, and oftentimes foolishly laughed at or stupidly dismissed as childish or immature. With everything I just said as a backbone, I'm about to challenge the "classic" Taxi Driver. If you're open-minded you'll give this review a chance. If you have the arrogant mentality of a whiney 4-year-old"It's a classic, that's all there is to it!"then don't even bother reading any further. There is no hope for your immature intellect.
First and foremost, Taxi Driver is not a completely worthless film. I'm not even going to try to argue that. It has had had a major influence on the way open-world movies and video games have been made, and possibly even invented the subgenre. Taxi Driver creates a realistic world, fills it with faceless scum characters, and openly lets the main character interact with them in a completely non-linear way. Some people find this completely boring, others find it completely genius. The entire film is hinged on if or if not you can emotionally relate to the main character. If so, these opening scenes of him interacting with his environment will likely captivate you. If not, these scenes will likely put you to sleepevery single time you attempt to watch it. Stating and argument on whether or not Taxi Driver is boring or not is completely pointless because it's completely opinion-based. Personally, however, I was bored out of my godforsaken mind until the last thirty minutes of the film. Movies have presented loneliness much better, in much more effective ways than this. Another 70s film, Straw Dogs, for example, examines realistic human emotion with much more depth.
DeNiro's acting is average at best, unless you're really studying so closely it's ridicules. If DeNiro wasn't so famous, no one, not a single review, would even mention his acting whatsoever. The character he plays is also completely average. Some people state that he has mental disabilities; if so, I didn't even notice. He was an average, typical, lonely character and nothing more. The majority of his time on screen he's staring at the walls or staring out his windshieldthat's not psychologically deep, it's typical. There is nothing, not one thing, psychologically deep about the main character. It literally makes me laugh every time I hear people calling the character of Travis "one of the most accurate psychological characters ever portrayed". If so, Napoleon Dynamite is the next Freud. Neither Travis nor Napoleon do anything whatsoever except stare at things. And we all can learn so much about the human condition from that.
An actual story doesn't even develop until the last thirty minutes of the film. Though it is somewhat nostalgic, it's a pretty typical example of 70s "shock value" that is about as shocking to us today as watching a dead tree stump rot. At least it didn't have a cliché, non-graphic rape scene like the hundred other 70s movies just like itI'll give Taxi Driver that credit. The final action scene is PG-13 at worst by today's standards, but it does give some much-needed diversity to the film. In fact, I would go as far as to say that the structure of Taxi driveropen-world, followed by a mini subplotwas a pretty fresh and creative idea for its time. It's almost prolific, considering the thousands of movies and video games that came out after it with the same style. But it's executed terribly here. Travis just repeats the same lines. He never really examines human nature or human behavior. It just gets old fast. The writers could have done so much more with this formula, but their lack of creativity and imagination is absolutely ridicules.
Overall, while the formula Taxi Driver follows is essential, the overall film is bland and forgettable. There were so many missed opportunities to bring true depth and insight into the film, but the writers didn't take them. The lack of any story at all gets very annoying very fast, mainly due to the average main character, played with an average performance. But I guess that is the moral of this non-story that all future directors should take note on: meritocracy wins over the imaginationless critics. And spineless viewers agree with every word they say.
4/10 | 6 |
What I liked of this film is the fotography, nice use of colors, nice interpretation of Tom Cruise but, few twists, but in the compless nice film. Disappointing of the choise of the Escobar's actor, he not seems for nothing the real escobar. | 7 |
Given the critics' enthusiasm, I went to see it with high expectations, and I came out frankly disappointed. The atmosphere felt realistic and some scenes (the sniper duel, the man with the explosive vest) made quite an impact; but I really had a problem with the central character, William James. I may be overpoliticized, but I just couldn't help perceiving him as a perfect embodiment of George W. Bush's America: Gung-ho, arrogant, reckless, impulsive, willing to put the lives of his comrades at risk and to abandon a loving family at home in order to pursue personal vendettas and get his adrenalin rushes... and, as I do with Bush, I despised him; I was almost rooting for him to get blown up, to be honest, because I thought he was a complete idiot who did almost everything wrong, and that he had no place in any serious professional army (something confirmed by opinions from war veterans I have read later). And yet Bigelow seems intent on portraying him as something of a "misguided hero", the classic rogue who doesn't go by the book but whose heart is in the right place. Therefore, it felt to me as if the movie, by condoning this man's reckless attitude, was somewhat also condoning the U.S. military campaign as something maybe equally misguided but nevertheless brave and noble. I have no idea where Bigelow stands politically, and I realize this might not be the message she wanted to convey at all; but it's the one I perceived, and it left me quite uncomfortable. | 4 |
The first episode peaked my interest but that was already a storyline I had in mind so it wasn't that new. As the season went on some episodes stood from the crowd, my favourite episode was The Doctor Strange one; it was dark , gritty and had heart, from the voice acting to the fight scenes. This medium allows creatives to take a chance and do something new and go the extra mile.
The Tchalla episode was beautiful and reminded me and I'm sure quite a number of people of how a talented Chadwick really was, I'll miss seeing from my screen The final episode was also top notch, quite a slight disappointment we never got to see the Gamora episode.
Overall Job well done. | 8 |
Wasn't expecting many similarities to GoT (s1-6) but i have noticed there are some shock value scenes you can see have been put in to mirror's it's predecessor. While it makes sense being the same world the filming of it just feels a bit off & if it wasn't for this scene I'd probably give it an 8.
These scenes can easily be skipped over in about 2 minutes and I'm actually enjoying the rest of the story unfold and how they are honouring the past series in other ways.
It's nice to have a piece of entertainment that you can sit back and enjoy that is not trying to ruin it predecessor like recent Amazon and Disney productions.
Even with the time jumps it is not confusing and I cannot wait to watch the rest! | 7 |
Great show, dark story and a welcome poke at the current glut of hero movies and shows.
Can't take it too seriously or get offended. It is an 18 in the UK.
I am however deeply offended by the awful accent by Karl Urban. Worst cockney since Don Cheadle and Dick Van Dyck. | 9 |
Sure, it had a few good cinematic shots.
But the story felt hollow - cardboard cutout characters - generic message delivery through enemy lands. Almost feel like they did it by the numbers. | 6 |
Totally overrated. Nothing more than others dark comedy movie. Made hype .. Total boring.
Only kudos to roman griiffin. A very talented kid. Just wonders stuck in boring storyline | 3 |
If you liked The Happening, then this stupid movie is right up your alley. Unfortunately for everyone else who understands what constitutes a good movie, Bird Box is pretty much the same as The Happening.
This movie has every cliche imaginable thrown in and executed poorly. Count the number of edits in the first five minutes alone. It's more than most two hour movies would have. It's the absolute laziest writing you could ever ask for.
This is a SyFy movie if SyFy realized it was garbage and threw it away, and then Netflix went dumpster diving, brushed the dirt off of this garbage, and fed it to us. | 1 |
The Boys could had beaten the Box office of JL. Thoughtful and realistic depiction of superpower beings. Top class CGI, although you will notice some inconsistency in some scene. Top class action and acting. | 9 |
The movie was a total abomination in comparison to the first one.
The jokes were not funny at all and a bit lame if I have to be honest.
There were 0 scenes where I thought ah yes I didn't see that one coming.
In general, the movie was just bad and cliche.
If you like action, special effects and a story that doesn't make any sense it's a fine movie.
If you like some quality and great storytelling I wouldn't recommend. | 1 |
I'm 30 minutes in and I'm in so much pain. I hate this movie. I want to cancel my netflix account because of this. Michael Bay isn't interested in making movies. He's interesting in finding pretty, oversaturated images and writing a movie around him. Michael Bay movies are like a commercial for the USA, but instead of being 30-50 seconds long, they're goddamn 120 minutes. This film is a crime against filmmaking. If you've ever wondered what a transformers movie without transformers would be, this is it. Let's hope I can finish it. | 3 |
Season 1 was the best, no editing, pure dialogues, it almost looked real👌👏. Season 2 was a bit slow but still it was good. | 9 |
Its missing the charm of the aninated series we all grew up with. I honestly don't know why you made a great show into a live action.. I looks just like 2 guys who went trick oe treating. | 2 |
I have no idea if this got better or not because I kept falling asleep and my 24 hour rental period ended before I could finish it so I'm giving it a 5 based on what I saw. First off, I am not a fan of sci-fi so that may make this an unfair review but I love Leonardo DiCaprio and this film came highly recommended by several friends. I also saw it was highly rated. But I don't get it. It's so ridiculous, nothing like this could ever happen so I was unable to get into the story. All I could focus on was how ridiculous it was and wonder why people like stuff like this. I couldn't even appreciate Leo's acting because he was playing a role in a film about nonsense. I like when acting seems real and this film didn't allow that to happen. If you are not into science fiction, fantasy, action or special effects or anything like that and prefer more reality with your films then I would skip this because there is nothing about it this could ever be possible. I just found myself rolling my eyes and as I said before, dozing off. | 5 |
Right, well I took my time getting around to watching this movie, but eventually got the chance to sit down and watch it.
Let me just start by saying that the movie is enjoyable and watchable, for sure. Especially the first 35 minutes of the movie, because it really shows how gritty, ugly and atrocious war is. And the way that whole part of the movie was set up was just amazing.
Then the next 25 minutes, the movie started to gear down, as the two characters were trekking about. Sure, it was still enjoyable. Then the last hour of the movie it just fell into mediocrity, and the movie never got out of that slump. And it was a shame, because it was off to such a marvelous start.
This movie is no "Saving Private Ryan", although there are similarities, for sure. But they are two very different movies, both in story and entertainment value.
I watched the movie, and was adequately entertained, however, I can't say that this is a movie that I will be returning to watch a second time around, because the movie just didn't have that much to offer. And those glorious 35 minutes in the start of the movie just didn't stretch to salvage the rest of the movie.
It should be said that the acting in the movie was adequate. Sure, this is not a movie that is heavy of thespian acting performances, but the people were doing good enough jobs with their given roles. But I really don't think that anyone were given any proper chance to shine and stand out in throughout the course of the movie.
Visually, then "1917" was good. It was a dirty and gritty movie, definitely making it feel like an authentic WW1 movie, and it did feel like you were right there in the muck with the soldiers.
My rating for the movie was initially going to be a 6 out of 10 stars, but because of the sliding down into mediocrity, then the movie settles on a 5 out of 10 stars from me. While it is watchable and enjoyable enough for what it turned out to be, it was by no means a milestone in war story cinema. | 5 |
The first season of Stranger Things was pure gold. Being born in the early 80's this show was obviously nostalgic gold for me and the mystery part was intense and well planned. You could really feel the constant danger lurking in the air in season 1.
By season 3 it has become a romance comedy show with a nostalgia overtone. The monsters are much like zombies in late seasons of a zombie show: no longer as dangerous and easily forgettable by the cast. As soon as there are no monsters present in season 3 no one is scared and there is no suspense. The kids just gather "cool stuff" and joke about how they will beat the monsters. They just laugh it off. The same goes for solving puzzles (it takes no time for them to solve the Russian "threat" in season 3 - no suspense what so ever).
Then of course we get the "diversity checkboxes", that are so prevalent today, in season 3 of Stranger Things. Forced and unnecessary.
It went from a 10 show to a 5 show for me. Too bad. | 7 |
Definitely worth the hype. So refreshing, so funny. The jokes are funny, the scenes without dialogues are funny, the situations are funny, truly a great comedy in every sense. Written very well, executed very well. Loved the cameos too. | 9 |
I'm only about 6 episodes in, so I will have to update this in the future. I'm new to anime, with only some exposure via Avatar, Korra, GITS. I actually watched the live-action 2017 movie first, and that piqued my interest enough to check out the original anime. This show already is much more detailed and in-depth than the movie (which I admittedly did like), yet still moves at a very quick pace. I'm definitely curious what there is left to explore in the remainder of a long season, but every episode so far has been very intriguing. There was definitely a lot of thought put into the play between Light and L and their constant intellectual chess (think the intricacies of the story in Primer). Very well done. Even though I'm new to anime, I know that the English dubbing is a big part of the review. The English dubbing on this show is amazing. Very great voice-acting. The actor voicing Ryuk actually sounds very much like Willem Defoe in the live-action movie-a pleasant coincidence! | 7 |
Great movie and amazing last series. thanks to the curators. | 10 |
I was smitten by several of the brothers' other work (Big Limbouski, Miller's Crossing,O Brother, Where Art Thou? Raising Arizona), and was primed to enjoy this much hyped film. The idea of the film is a simple joke: what if you set a grim tail of desperation in the banal setting of Minnesota. Characters would be wonderful because of their grit and pedestrian nature in extraordinary circumstances.
Done well, such characterizations would do away with a need for a compelling plot. Sadly, despite fine acting, the characters aren't compelling, leaving the plot to plod on to its inevitable conclusion -boredom. Joel Coen has left me wondering why he bothered to make this film, with all the charm of a drunk-driving accident.
Fargo's only saving grace is that it is ever so slightly more tolerable than Intolerable Cruelty. | 4 |
Phew! I gave this one two stars, just because some of the effects were quite good. Other than that, I have to say, there is very little to like. Perhaps you have to be a baby-boomer to a really appreciate it. I'm a buster myself, and I've never been able to understand the wodges of gooey praise that boomers like to pile on to this fetid piece of corn.
Tom Hanks (whom I actually like) has to hold a record for the easiest Oscar in history. How hard could it be to just belt out your lines in a flat monotone, without ever having to show any sign of comprehension or complex emotion? Forrest Gump in love looks an awful lot like Forrest Gump confused, or Forrest Gump angry, as far as I can tell. The members of the Academy are suckers for mentally disabled protagonists, but Hanks's Gump has neither the depth of Dustin Hoffman's Raymond ("Rain Man") Babbit nor the extraordinary movements and expressions of Daniel Day-Lewis's Christy Brown.
If, like me, you like to see ALL the Oscar winners, I suppose you'll have to endure Forrest Gump at some point in your life. Otherwise, stay away! | 2 |
Deathly Hallows Part 1 serves as a necessary separate movie to set the stage for the finale. It takes place outside of Hogwarts which is cool and interesting to see but I feel like it makes it lose some magic and connection to the others. There's also a lot that happens in terms of chasing down Voldemort's horcruxes but ultimately there's no "major" scenes. Again, more so serving the purpose to reveal history and context to prepare everyone for the last movie. It also had moments that were a little dragged out and boring at times. But nevertheless, it was needed to pave the way for the best and last movie of the HP series. | 7 |
Inception?
Incomprehension is more like it.
Techno-babble, psycho-babble, and just plain babble fill a third of the film, providing the audience with the rules of the game and the back story of the main character. Unfortunately, much of it is unnecessary and difficult to follow and takes the place of character interaction, character growth, and emotion. Inception is a gargantuan, cinematic meditation on dreams and reality. Zzzzzz. That's the sound of me snoring.
The only thing worse than being bored at a film is being bored AND not giving a crap. And that's the case here. There's not a single character to care about. Oh sure there is a preponderance of cool effects, people hanging weightless in time and space and climbing on ceilings, but without a cohesive narrative or anyone to root for, they're just pretty images flashing on a big screen at a frenetic pace.
Don't get me wrong, somewhere there is a good film here. Or at least there could have been. But as it stands it is a story not well told.
Which is easier to explain: the plot of this film or the praise hefted upon it by critics and everyone else on this forum? Has Christopher Nolan risen to the level of Marty Scorsese and James Cameron where films are lauded despite whatever self-indulgent, effects-laden dreck they put on the screen?
All throughout Inception I wanted to shoot myself so that I could wake up from this bad movie. Unfortunately my top stopped spinning and the reality set in: another lousy film in the Summer of 2010. Wake me when it's over. | 1 |
Gets better each episode. Nice bit of banter and predictable Marvel action. It's nice that they are not ignoring the consequences of past avenger films. | 8 |
From where I'm sitting I'd say that the effeminate, "don't-muss-my-hair", Robert Downey Jr. was the absolute worst choice, bar none, to play the Tony Stark/Iron Man character.
Tony Stark may have been a weapons designer extraordinaire and the darling-of-the-hour, but, hey, believe me, he certainly had a lot more money than he did sense. But, nevertheless, Tony Stark was destined to become more than just a nuts-n-bolts type of guy.
When Tony wasn't designing fabulous weapons he was just a jaded, apathetic, alcoholic who really loved nothing more than to verbally humiliate, insult and degrade women.
And, naturally, being Tony Stark, after he had verbally degraded the hottest chicks imaginable, they, of course, would get all wet for him. And then, without delay, it would be "wham-bam-thank-you-mam", before Tony was moving onto his next conquest.
My-Oh-My! Wasn't life as a #1, billionaire, playboy just so rewarding and fulfilling?
It really killed me the way that Tony Stark and Obadiah Stane kept dancing around one another like a couple of "horny-for-each-other" gays. With the way that they carried on, I was half-expecting that, soon enough, these 2 darlings would be jumping into the sack together for a little "in-out-in-out" just like a couple of randy comrades.
To have made Tony Stark a "Super-Hero" at the end of this "Rocketeer Meets Robocop" flick was a literal joke and a half. Tony's change of heart from being a first-class crumb to a civic-minded do-gooder was about as insincere and pretentious as you could possibly get. And it was all made so frickin' laughable because precious, little Robert Downey Jr. was such a bloody bore and so totally unconvincing in his part.
And finally - It sure helped to have the Afghanistan rebels portrayed in this film as being a bunch of absolute soul-less monsters - Real "dirt-of-the-earth". And annihilating the likes of them was so easy to do. Yeah. It was just as if Iron Man had literally wiped his crusty, tin-plated ass with them and then conveniently flushed them right down the toilet.
Yep. Indeed. Iron Man is yet another prime example of why, over this past decade, superhero movies have become my least favorite genre of all (which, of course, makes them perfectly ideal for a damn-good trashing).
P.S. - Did Iron Man's screenplay really require the input of 8 (!!!) contributing writers!? (sheesh!) | 4 |
Uninspired high gloss kiddie comic adaption with acceptable visual effects and a screenplay that fits on one sheet of toilet paper...
It is almost incredible how this Movie could be so highly rated. Must be indebted by the target group which exists from nerd comic-fans and teenagers without an clue what makes a good movie...
The characters are flat and as a result none of the (normaly good) actors is capable of convincing.
What's left is the typical action-loaded special effects spectacle. But even in this category nothing is extraordinary or surprising.
Let's hope, that someone saves us from a sequel, is hard to underbid that... | 4 |
The best of Netflix's feature films so far, but it still falls short of a good, quality motion picture. Even the likes of Sandra Bullock and John Malkovich couldn't save the poorly-written script, scant of plot, character development and clear direction. It is obvious that Netflix's only business plan is to crank out as much original programming as possible with a "name-brand" cast & crew. There is absolutely no regard at all for quality programming. Their money would be better spent on licensing agreements with studios that have programming people want to watch (you know, the stuff on Netflix that the subscribers actually watch). | 5 |
After reading all the hype, I had to check it out for myself.....WOW!
Visually it is the most epic and magnificently done mini series I've ever seen. It really does feel like an 'on the spot' documentary, and I've never seen better in a mega-budget motion picture. The acting is truly wonderful, although the thick British accents by some is a little off-putting given everything in print was presented in Russian. But just a trivial grievance on my part.
I have studied the incident a fair bit over the years - fascinated at how something could go so horribly wrong given there are nearly 500 reactors in the world which have been operating for decades without issue. The appearance of the forest, the plant, the reactor post-accident, the equipment, the uniforms, the town of Pripiyat etc. are all eerily accurate. The research that went into this series must have been pain staking.
My only criticism was that there could have been just a little more narrative earlier on to explain the mechanics around why the explosion took place, rather than wait until the final episode to piece it all together for the viewer.
But still overall, possibly the best television I have ever watched. | 9 |
The style and visuals were a treat, but this movie failed to appeal me on all other points. The story is very unbalanced, filled with awkward cliche's and forced jokes. It's an acceptable movie, and if I could I'd give it half a point more, but the total overhype and ridiculous celebration of this movie made me dust off my IMDB account to leave this review. | 6 |
I'm glad they split the final book in two movies, but there is still so much more! (READ the books, people!) Nevertheless, it was a fantastic movie. | 10 |
This series tells about the terrible events that took place in Chernobyl. The actors are well chosen. And their acting is top notch. The series keeps you hooked until the very end. I think this series is one of the best.
I liked the atmosphere that the series conveys. We can dive into that time. | 8 |
I won't dare to say a single word about this kind of real operation! The creator of this movie show this great incident in a very realistic way. I would appriciate the courage of the director. This is one of the best movie i've ever seen. RESPECT to "The Indian army" | 10 |
Love Bill Murray and of course Scarlet's a cutie but omg Bill what were you thinking being in this..... it was like pulling teeth.
NOTHINNNNNNNG happened. It was so boring. Japan looks nice but the film was terrible. I mean he is old enough to be her dad/grandad so I was hoping they didn't DO anything, but crikey the film was empty. | 1 |
This movie truly seems to be the Emperor's New Clothes with so many people pretending it's genius because they're too afraid to admit they don't understand this complete and utter drivel.
The only reason I gave it 3/10 instead of zero is that it does contain humourous moments... although those are mostly ridiculous and do nothing to help you understand the plot.
If I were Jamie Lee Curtis I'd be insulted to have won a Best Supporting Actress Oscar for a role she must have had no inkling of whether she was doing a good job or not. How could she? Then again, perhaps that's the true test of acting ability! If you really want to witness JLC delivering an award winning performance, watch S2 E6 of 'The Bear'. You'll be much better rewarded for your time than the 2+ hours I'll never get back from this crap! | 3 |
A movie about boring unfunny botox induced people going on boring unfunny botox induced adventures. If that's what they were going for, mission accomplished I guess. | 3 |
Films at the moment seem to be packed full of stunning & beautiful CGI effects, but not much else. The Lion King live action is certainly no different. The Disney original from 1994 has charm, class, excitement, humor & most importantly soul. It is an undoubted masterpiece. This version has little or non of these qualities. Yes the animation & CGI are absolutely gorgeous, but I was expecting to see David Attenborough pop up at any second to narrate the scene. It felt like a nicely done wildlife documentary without the bits where animals eat each other. Also dispite a wonderfull cast & the awesome velvety tones of the fabulous James Earl Jones, the voice acting seemed very off somehow, & almost miscast. The only bit I really enjoyed was the "Wimoweh" song (originally written by Zulu artist Solomon Linda as "Mbube" meaning Lion) which was nicely done.
Overall this is not a bad film, & I feel children will love it. I feel it just falls into the trap of not being as good as the original. Remakes are rarely, if ever as good as the original, & the Lion King is no exception. Yet I have to ask, is there no original talent at Disney Corps anymore? Why all the remakes? Can no one come up with something new?
Finally, when I first saw The Lion King in 1994 (I was a 25 year old woman) I freely admit I was drawn to tears in the opening scenes. I had shivvers down my back & was completely enthralled. Some years later I saw the awesome stage show, not just once but several times, so I consider myself a fan of the story, but this latest offering, for me falls flat, as flat as a flat packed new bookcase. I heard the Lion's roar in 1994...This movie is sadly just a cubs whimper! | 4 |
This was nicely done. It's a great send-up of, and homage to, all those "Chop Socky" films that have come from Asia and elsewhere. This was well produced, funny, and well paced.
The computer generated special effects were well enough done and just added to the over-the-top comedic nature of the whole affair. This movie does _not_ take itself seriously and that's a welcome change after the overly pretentious films like "Hero" and "House of Flying Daggers." The actors in this flick all had a good time in their roles and were fun to watch.
All in all, this was a good bit of entertainment! | 8 |
Before finishing the book, I noticed it had been made into a show, and looked forward to seeing the story translated to video. I waited to watch until I finished reading the book, and I'm glad I did. I was extremely disappointed in the show... some characters weren't what I was expecting (which is not uncommon in book to cinema), some unnecessary changes were made to the story (also not uncommon, but still disappointing). The worst was the story's pace - it just took too long to tell and hardly felt like it was going anywhere, and the musical score went at about the same speed. When I saw that put up the "If you liked 'The Outsider,' you might also enjoy watching..." window, I expected it to say "Paint Dry" or "Grass Growing." Do yourself a favor - read it, don't watch it. | 2 |
The cinematography, the acting, the story, the casting, the writing, EVERYTHING is ridiculously on point in this show.
The psychology involved unfolds amazingly, adding many layers of intrigue and mystery. Hannibal is charming and intelligent, the epitome of good taste... Minus the obvious flaw in his character of course. Will is a tortured mind, but in an extremely likable way, a mind you want to wander around in to help him find the clues he so desperately needs.
A beautiful macabre masterpiece of a show. I truly hope this will get many a season. | 10 |
The film is impeccable, the color processing developed for the occasion gives a remarkable result. The soundtrack is sympathetic to who appreciates jazz. Unfortunately this is not enough to make a good movie. The scenario should be up to par. This is not the case. It's boring. We leave with an impression of banality, of déjà-vu. The story is hollow, the dialogues are hollow, the lyrics of the songs are hollow. A vaguely romantic tale on a colorful background. It's not enough. | 6 |
I had skepticism over these being the same writers as "Thor" Dark World".. My mind was pleasantly set at ease upon the 1st 15min of viewing.. Marcus & McFeely are in their toppest form and IMO have peaked as writers with "The Winter Soldier", paralled only by "IW". The Russos are also at the top of their directing game, with visuals that would please even the utmost demanding.. Without a doubt MCU's very best film, and also thoroughly an all genere cinematic classic to stand the test of time. | 10 |
Educational value alone makes it a must watch. Elegantly written, with tons of tension, terrific acting and best casting I saw in a long time. Even CGI was fantastic. 5 episodes was just enough, the only fault i could find was a bit bloated episode 4, where we were forced to watch uninteresting, irrelevant character undergoing some change. Would be a 9 or 10 with this 30 minutes deleted. | 8 |
Watching the trailer before going to cinema I had high expectations from this movie. Looked at the beginning like it was going to be something really exciting. However, while in the cinema, at some points I started to yawn although it was 12noon! Their acting is good, Hermione became now a pretty lady and I was happy to see that she developed her acting skills. Overall it wasn't boring, the movie had good action, some romance, a bit of thrill but still did not raise the bar as everyone was expecting and moreover it was kind of predictable for me. HP fans are encouraged to watch it but if you are looking for an excellent movie you might be disappointed. 7/10 from me. | 7 |
The whole show revolves around some main moments in marvel history with some different storylines . It was fun to watch and idk why people hated it that much but it's a must for marvel fans for a great binge watch. | 8 |
So ye, last night i was bored enough to choose this movie, also knowing i disliked Juno, and Knocked Up, 40 YO Virgin had it's moments so ye, why not give it a try, yet after the first 20 mins, i found myself going towards the same way as the previous movies mentioned.
Superbad brings nothing new to cinema, the story is poor, although the scenes are somehow realistic as they explains well, how going out at night can be, and how dumb of people you can find outside.
OK as for the movie, Jonah Hill from pretty much the start of the movie until the end, he uses the same expressions which doesn't take long to get old and boring, plus well he's funny, but not that funny.
As for Michael Cera, i like his character being always polite and stuff, yet there's some moments less solid about this as well, first his character isn't even funny, and then at some parts he starts to become some sort of "outlaw" which motivates a little bit, but then goes back to what it was.
For least but not last Christopher Mintz-Plasse, he brings a fresh air to a really boring part of the movie and his entrance in the movie is probably the only one that made me give the most honestly laugh all the entire movie. My hopes go up as am waiting to see if this guy can start being funny, yet i was wrong again....
The whole move is cheap and poor, just like Knocked Up, let alone Juno... Ellen Page is more than that.
Long story short, don't watch this movie alone, or you will either give up, or find it really bad, the movie is funny enough to entertain but hardly funny to make you laugh, or perhaps if you like basic verbal stuff and that you will explode laughing.
Pick a good moment to watch it, with friends, on a party, if you are in a mood to laugh at anything that comes up, just if your not in a good mood, don't expect it to put you in that good mood....
Superbad is more like Super poor. | 6 |
This is a movie that you watch for the audiovisuals. The makers of this movie have done a good job regarding the visuals. The soundtrack is also useful.
But that are the only things that are good. There is absolutely no story to tell. The acting is average and sometimes even annoying. The movie is too short too have a decent story. The movie tries to be realistic, but fails too depict this to the viewer. It's a shame, because this movie could be so much better if the makers had took some time to improve the above points.
I recommend this movie only to the people that want to enjoy the good visuals. For an intelligent science-fiction you should be searching elsewhere. | 5 |
The growth of the comic book super hero genre in movies today is spectacularly fecund. Marvel seems to be the biggest box office draw in the last 10 years. I hate to say this but it is part of the dumbing down of America; where once juvenile past-times and B movie drive-in and late night TV diversions are A list tickets these days. So, in that eruption of mega corporation mass marketing, a smaller "counter-culture" of movies and shows mocking and satirizing the genre. Ironically they are usually based on graphic novels like this one and Happy. And like Happy, this one is ultra violent and devoid of any really likeable or heroic characters. But this one ratchets the cynicism and violence up one more notch. For instance, the main super-"hero", Homelander, is Super Man meets Captain America all star white guy stereotype. To top it off, he is an ordained minister. Of course, he is an utter evil and depraved man, the worst of the lot. The soups, as they are called, are run by a corporation called Vought, where the cynical jaded head of it, Madelyn Stillwell, played by Elisabeth Shue, manipulates and protects her screwed up heroes. The corporation is all about money and publicity and turn every super-hero mission into social media click-bait event. The corporation also wants to get into the Pentagon defense complex. Then enter Hughie Campbell, Dennis Quaid's son Jack, a computer service tech. He was talking to his girlfriend on the street when she got gorily and horrifically splattered by a soup called A-Train who is their Flash counterpart. Not only was that over the top violent, but it suggests that running people down is a regular item for A Train, since he seems unable to dodge obstacles in his way. Come on, that is a really stupid way to get about. Well, poor Hughie was jerked around by Vought's lawyers and let down by his amiable but weak dad. So enter Billy Butcher, aka Karl Urban, a fast talking con-man come vigilante who knows what conniving scum Vought's soups are. So he convinces Hughie to go along with a plan to bug Vought's inner sanctum. Then another brutish soup, Translucent, gets wind of this and follows Hughie back to his shop to beat and try to pump info out of our hapless Hughie. But Butcher returns in the nick of time to save Hughie from this warped soup and the two, with the aid of another comic book sort called Frenchie, imprisons then eventually ends up killing Translucent. From then on, we were exposed to one nasty brutish violent incident and gun fight after another, interspersed with scenes of ruthless corporate behavior and horrific sex. Such as where a female soup called Popclaw, a Wolverine knock off, sits on then crushes a hapless guy's head after she enticed him in her bedroom for sex. Then we have a #metoo subplot, there's the sleazy soup The Deep, an Aquaman imitation, coerced a new pretty female soup Starlight aka Annie January, for some sex. Ironically the Deep was one of the less evil soups and Starlight was a virtual goddess of a classic superhero and a small town conservative Christian woman to boot. Then the Deep has a bestiality streak with a dolphin, which is cheezy enough. But he kidnaps the dolphin and when he wrecks the van, the poor dolphin gets graphically squished by an 18 wheeler.
This show just loves trashing everything from religion to even motherhood, where Vought gets mothers to be to take a drug that causes their infants to be soups. The cynicism, like the extreme violence and sex it promotes, is plain ugly. The indie movie "Super" was a good take off on super heroes w/o the extremes of this. But it is addicting and Amazon's high budget and packaging makes it easy to binge watch. It also has the malignant Seth Rogen as its producer. | 3 |
This movie has some really good action and Chris Hemsworth does a good job. The problem in this movie is that the plot is pretty weak. | 7 |
Where to begin - the movie got it all wrong. Starting from a lack of character building to absolutely missing the mark when it comes to Dhaka's portrayal, Extraction seriously disappointed after all the hype it generated. The only reason it merits one star is due to the greatly orchestrated action scenes and the fact that it's a Chris Hemsworth starrer. Would definitely not recommend, unless you really want to waste 2 hrs of your life. | 1 |
Hit monkey is really clever at its length but dissapointing at character development and animation frame although animation style is average.. Not present new! | 6 |
Hoping it gets better and to SOME point by the end of ONE episode. It just doesn't. Every episode doesn't even serve a purpose. Maybe you think they do, but they end up NOT. Waste, waste, waste.
No cliffhangers either. Dispensable and dispicable.
Her blood hasn't seem to do anything. There's no maps. There's no anything. Every episode ends just like it begins. It's like a bad chapter in a novel you want to try to keep reading but just have to put it down or use it for kindling. This show sucks really that bad and doesn't serve a purpose here. Like I said, you want to. But it is really THAT BAD. | 1 |
And WATCH IT!! Honestly, this anime is great, but is it the best? ...No. The main character is the bad guy, which is rare. The plot is smart and unpredictable, which is a very good thing. The animation is awesome and helps with the dark tone of this show, and even makes the characters seem more lifelike and stand out. What bothers me about a lot of anime is that when a character walks down a street, it's like he's walking down a still picture since the cars and people are standing still, as if painted into the background. But no, oh no, not this show. The producers and animators and directors and everyone else actually did a very good job adapting this anime from the great SJA *Shonen Jump Advanced) manga of the same name. The characters you love to hate, love or just simply want to drag out of the TV screen just to tell them to shut up are used very well.
My favourite character is L, mainly because I can relate to him with being smart, hardly ever going outside, doesn't wear socks and of course has a major sweet tooth. Now for the plot: Ryuk, a death god (or Shinigami, pick one) is extremely bored with, pardon the pun, 'life' in the world of the Shinigamis drops a notebook into the human world as an experiment. An excelling high school senior who's just as bored with 'actual' life as Ryuk with his world, finds the notebook and picks it up. He reads the instructions of the Death Note, "Those whose name is written in this notebook shall die" and thinks it's all just a big joke. Still, he takes it home and tests it out on some criminal he sees on the news and naturally freaks out when he realizes the Death Note works. Soon though, like a siren, it grabs hold of him and he begins to think that he will become the 'god of the new world' by killing every criminal in the world. This sets off a chain of events that eventually brings in L, a genius detective who works in secret to track down Light, dubbed "Kira" by the public that supports him. Since Light needs a name and a face to kill someone, Light begins his quest to track down L and kill him, all the while with Ryuk watching and giving the odd hilarious remark or comment, mostly about apples. Overall, I give this anime my first ten.
All you Light fans, don't write my name in your own notebook just because I think Light is an ass and L's awesome. Frankly (and this is one of my only complaints about the show) Light should have been caught about thirteen episodes in, maybe even less. He's way too arrogant and careless at first. The whole way he dealt with the Penber situation was so flawed that L should have figured him out. But whatever. It doesn't take much out of the show. | 9 |
There are two kinds of people in the world, my friend. Those who dig Forrest Gump, and those who don't. I don't. If "Forrest Gump" is truly viewed as some kind of inspirational cinematic experience, then America is in a lot of trouble. Forrest Gump is no masterpiece of cinema, not even by a long-shot. It is largely a formulated overly sentimental contrivance that simply plays too well into American saccharine tastes, mostly pop melodrama for the sake of pop melodrama. This was obviously made for the same audience that likes "Sleepless in Seattle" and "Lucky You".
Certainly, I don't have a problem with the idea of a feeble-minded main character from which to tell a story. ("Rain Man", a similar idea, is a far superior story to and much more real than the silliness of "Gump".) I will concede Hanks' portrayal of Forrest is no less than brilliant, and he was deserving of the Academy Award for Best Actor in 1994. But was this film really deserving of Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Writing? Is this film really in the same league as "Schindler's List", "Ghandhi", "The Hurt Locker", and "Platoon"? I don't think so.
A contrived stooge, a late 20th century throw-back to Lenny of "Of Mice and Men" ("Tell me about the rabbits, George"), enmeshed in a series of sentimentalized vignettes is nothing more than contrived farce. Does Gump represent the American ideal or fictionalized empty-headed-ness? Forrest Gump only mirrors American's insatiable appetite for the overly sentimental. Instead of telling a true human story, such as "Rain Man", about the struggles of a man verging on feeble-mindedness, the filmmakers decided to sentimentalize him and put him into the most ridiculous and unbelievable of situations. Because of the fantastical nature of the entire story, I think "Gump" does a disservice to those with intellectual disabilities, although I will admit it does so inadvertently. "Rain Man" I think achieves quite the opposite.
So many of the scenes in this movie made no sense. In the opening sequence when young Forrest's legs are in braces and, inspired by the "girl next door", he begins running down a Midwest dirt road, and his braces magically come off. Oh brother. Only Hollywood could imagine something that rings of a bad "Saturday Evening Post" illustration from the 1950's. Not even Norman Rockwell would have painted something quite so contrived. Of course the "running theme" will recur toward the end of the the film. Later, despite his feeble-mindedness, he's drafted into the army where he puts his rifle together faster and better than anyone in training. He's a feeble-minded genius. Maybe an idiot-savant?
During the course of much of the film, Gump ends up involved in the most unlikely of situations. He plays football under a legendary college coach, goes to Vietnam, wins a congressional medal, meets John F Kennedy, becomes a ping-pong champion, meets John Lennon, informs on the Watergate burglars, and ends up investing his ping-pong winnings into the Apple Computer company. And then goes on a pointless "run" where all these people run after him. Or maybe this last part is realistic. Not about Forrest running but that people would follow. Obviously everybody followed Gump to the box office. And then to the Academy Awards. It's a wonder the filmmakers didn't have him take the next logical step and have him run for president. Raymond Babbitt (the autistic character from "Rain Man" played by Dustin Hoffman) could be his running mate.
The only saving grace of the film is some of the Vietnam sequences, and his relationship with Lut. Dan played by Gary Sinese, who is the other standout talent of the film. Gump's tour of duty and his relationship with Dan were far more substantive than all the rest of the movie put together. I think it would have been far more interesting and insightful if the story was about a feeble-minded man forced to fight in Vietnam rather than adding all the other asinine episodes that made me say to myself, "Oh come on..." And I liked aspects of Gump's relationship with Dan, and I wished that had been more developed rather than Gump popping up in high spots of American history. When Gump reports the Watergate burglary, I just about lost my popcorn.
The recurring theme of "Gump" is "life was like a box of chocolates. You never know what you're gonna get.". As I have never liked most of the candies in those boxes (I always end up with the slimy gooey ones), I guess I am not the right viewer to appreciate the wonders of "Forrest Gump". I typically avoid those boxes of candies just for that reason. I want something that has a little more meat to it, a little more realism, and a little more honesty. Not just gooey caramel. Whoever wrote Forrest Gump was eating a box of these candies and decided to make a movie about it. The problem with those box of chocolates is that you know exactly what you're going to get and that's why I avoid them. | 3 |
Henry cavil lived in the character of Witcher. Screen play is just amazing😍😍😍. Few scenes are just as same as in game.reason for nine stars:- 1. Fight scenes 2.main lead performance 3.music 4. Few scenes are just same as game. They portrait it same from game.
5. Screenplay 6.cinematography 7. Duration of eight episodes. | 9 |
I have to agree that calling "The Godfather II" a sequel is pretty insulting. This is one of those rare sequels that almost surpasses the first one, and considering how amazing the first Godfather was, that says a lot. "The Godfather II" is longer, but in some ways richer. People may say that, as in the case of the first one, it is slow and takes time to open up. Sure, but I think it was intentional. There is something elegiac about both this and the first Godfather, which makes them even more irresistible.
On the one hand, the film is very well made. The cinematography is simply magnificent, whether it's dark, autumnal or picturesque, and the scenery is amazing. The music is great again, it catches and sticks in my head for a long time. In addition, there is a brilliantly written script, smart and thoughtful, a masterful direction by Francis Ford Coppola and a fabulously constructed story. There are indeed some great scenes in the film: the scenes where Vito escapes from Sicily have the grandeur of a silent movie, while the scenes in Cuba actually avoid clumsiness and confusion, and the climax is extremely frightening. Not to mention the Pop Goes the Weasel scene, which was very funny.
The acting is once again great. Vito is brilliantly played by Robert De Niro in one of his best roles. I was also attracted to Robert Duvall as Faithful Tom, John Casale and Diane Keaton. But the painting belongs to Al Pacino. He was great in the first Godfather movie, but he's even better here. He's just phenomenal, and to be honest, I think he should have won that Oscar. Overall, a terrific movie and one of the best sequels. | 8 |
Natalie, Natalie, Natalie! Why? This movie has the potential to be interesting but.... Is it SciFi? Is it Action Adventure? Is it a drama? What's up with the all female unit? Was the female unit thing trying to be politically correct? Don't know what I watched and why I looked as long as I did. Portman missed the mark of being believeable as a hardened soldier. This would have been better as a zombie movie. | 2 |
My wife really wanted to watch this movie, 2 hours of mind-numbing boredom, don't bother. | 1 |
The best "robots" ever. The robots in this show are way better than anything ever, in any show, anywhere. They are possibly unbeatable. Whoever conceived them, and the artists that rendered them, deserve an Emmy on that alone.
The scenery and alien landscapes are 10+. The space scenes are 10+ but a little implausible (Season 3). You could not have a ship orbiting a star that close. The temperature would vaporize even metals besides Tungsten, and especially a double star, which, if those stars were that close they'd be distended by gravity and there'd be a stream of hot plasma streaming between them and no orbit would be stable. The "asteroid" field would have pulverized itself into Saturn style rings within years or decades. You can't have a 2 mile deep valley with livable atmospheric pressure while the rest of the planet is vacuum. It's all total fantasy and I don't know why they bothered doing that when realistic scenarios would have been just as good visually. Also the people are too smart and capable. Judy Robinson is, wait, a doctor, a physicist, a technician who can fix a spaceship with bubblegum and a pencil, a captain, a star athlete, can climb vertical rock faces like she has rocket boots on etc etc it goes on and on. The show spends a lot of time on soggy emotions, worrying about inter-personal drama trivialities while they are struggling for their very survival.
But, if you accept all that stuff, the show is top notch. The stories are pretty good. There are enough surprises to make it interesting (lack of predictability).
As a note, if this show is intended for kids, the robots are way too scary. I think they would give children nightmares, really. | 8 |
I watched two episodes and barley made it through. This show has potential but it progress too slow. I can't even describe in words how boring it is. | 4 |
Honestly, watched this series i feel like i watch my self. Wanda is literally me that makes another world (in my mind) so that I feel happy, even though it's all fake. She wakes me up. | 8 |
Perfect tribute to indian army best movie ever ever | 10 |
Yes the power of the series which makes you to watch is story . Story is really good | 9 |
I don't understand why they decided to go for a complete tonal shift in season 3, when compared to 1 & 2. Season 3 went with a full on horror/comedy route leaving behind the heart and character development that was so prevalent in seasons 1 & 2. And don't get me started on those painfully embarrassing product placements. Weirdly after season 3 , for once in my life I'm not looking forward to season 4. Something tells me they've lost the magic touch completely. It's going to go down the Micheal Bay route from now on, more explosions and more monsters. I'd like to remember Stranger Things for seaonss 1 & 2, for me Season 3 never happened. | 5 |
It is really funny that James Spader, who has made a career of playing yuppie bastards, got an award for playing Graham, an anti-yuppie, a weirdo (the yuppie bastard here is played by Peter Gallagher, whose perfect performance is too often overlooked). This is Spader at his very best, as you never saw him before, if you had noticed him before, that is. Although, when you look back, Spader always seems to have given his characters a little freaky edge (something about his dreamy look, or his slow drawl); one of my favourite scenes in this film is the one in which Graham explains his one-key theory to his one-time buddy over dinner, and you sense that they have really nothing in common any more. Graham stands next to Hippolyte's Girardot's character in Eric Rochant's "Un monde sans pitié" and J.P. Belmondo's character in Godard's "A bout de souffle" for me; even next to Holden Caulfield; he is unique and real; I just like him, and not just because of the sound his shoes make while he walks to the bathroom (false alarm) on his first visit to Ann. | 9 |
6/10 could have been a 9/10 if it had been 4 episodes long instead of 6. The plot writing is solid, but instead of moving along at a decent clip it drags on and on with no real new developments. This greatly hurts the story telling because anything that should come as a surprise or a twist, is blatantly obvious and predictable before it happens. They leave the viewer with too much time and drop too many hints in order to try and keep it relevant, but it just ends up ruining the climax. | 6 |
Though the story has a lot of plot holes, the lovable characters and how the same story develops between the different parts it's something I have never seen before. Every part is unique and changes a lot from the last one, this could be the reason why this show is so recognized, but there's more.
The bizarre situations the characters live and the way that Jojo's shows it it's just fantastic and keeps you wanting more of how bizarre it could be. The poses, the openings, the funny moments and everything I have said probably makes jojo one of the greatest shows out there. The first part is very weak, but in part 2 everything just keeps getting better and better! That's why I think i'ts the best part, but you'll see why if you watch the show.
That's all I have to say, Joseph best Jojo. | 7 |
This is pure and simple great fun. Ignore all the bad reviews - these are from those who dearly wanted a repeat of the original. It is not a sequel and it is not meant to be and those who are confused about this are mislead by the 'knives out' inclusion in title. It is immensely colourful in terms of the set- which is worthy of a James Bond finale scene, the staging, the cast and the script which is fast, punchy and arresting. If I have an issue it is that it is a little slow to start but once the action kicks off fully it doesn't stop. The final scene is as good as any I have seen, visually exciting and extravagant. | 9 |
So in the beginning, I thought this is ridiculous mainly Kate Winslet because her acting was a bit unusual or overreacted. but wait for it, it got interesting after the break up when Joel wants to forget Clementine, but in the prosses of erasing her from his brain Joel change his decision and tried to stop the prosses which he could not while half unconscious.
I believe, "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind" is about the power of love and how much difficult is it to forget our beloved one, even if want to forget the power of love and attraction will continuously find and compel us to bend the knee to the almighty love.
In my opinion, the movie is excellent, especially Jim Carrey's acting, the script, and the way it is manifested through the power of abstract. | 7 |
This won an Academy Award? must've been a bad year It was different i'll give it that but otherwise there's very little to be enthused about other then when it ended. | 3 |
Well, it seems all the Netflix has to offer is VERY bad old and new movies and a very little number of old good movies. With this movie I probably will cancel my subscription. It's not worth it. | 3 |
After the very long wait I could hardly believe this project was finally finished. With great excitement I made my self comfortable and waited for the best Movie of the year. I didn't get the best Movie of the year. This is a slow Movie with little to no Action.
It drags on and on and could have had over an hour cut from it and it would still drag on and on.
What was the point ?
I'm a huge fan of all involved here but this was not a great Movie.
It wasn't clever or endearing. I will never watch it again.
What more can I say. | 5 |
Very interesting and dare I say frighteningly realistic take on the superhero genre, combining it with everything that has corrupted the modern real world - out of control capitalism, corporations and money controlling politics and basically everything, and the across-the-board corruption of moral values that ensues. Now that might sound gruelling but the show mostly keeps a pretty light tone of black comedy satire while it makes its pointed social critiques.
I don't love the Hughie character or performance but Karl Urban is an absolute riot in every scene he's in and the rest of the cast is pretty good. Visually and in terms of score it's not quite on par with the best things out there but definitely above average, and there's a wit and creativity to the writing that you'd expect from a show created by Evan Goldberg and Seth Rogen. I just hope they keep their eyes on the road this time, given their last show Preacher (also based on an insane comics) took a serious dive after its fantastic first season when it seemed like they got distracted with other projects. Would be a shame if the same thing happened to The Boys given the level of promise. | 9 |
John le Carre it is not even though it is a true story and should be.
Depth and credibility missing. Mainly British cast tying to be Americans. Filmed in Lithuania, I found the series shallow and even exasperating to watch. Low budget and missing basic attention to detail of the time. I don't understand the high ratings
Aldrich character was not developed. He's a one dimensional neurotic. The real Aldrich clearly was devious and intelligent to get away with his betrayal of so many and d his country for so long. The people who died because of him is such an indictment of him and all involved. But where is the credibility? This a true story!
Sandy Grimes is portrayed as constantly under duress and not coping well with anything! The lead is miscast.
I've read on the subject and watched interviews and lectures given by Sandy Grimes and Jeanne Vertefeuille. These women and their team were brilliant. They have been badly served by 'The Assets' .
Finally, " Aldrich Ames: Traitor Within" (1998) with lead, Timothy Hutton, was a better telling of the real story though doesn't rate as high as 'the Assets' for some reason. It's not great but it's better than this lame mini series. | 2 |
I totally don't understand the awful reviews, we're only 2 episodes in!!
The opening 2 episodes YES are a bit weird, and YES are totally different to anything we've seen in the MCU.
But we have 7 episodes to go, and have you not seen the trailers...its obviously going to get soooooo good!!
Give it time before you start with the negatives 😊 | 9 |
I love pirate adventure and Curse of the Black Pearl seemed to have it for the first half hour or so... but as usual, Bruckheimer's bloated action sequences with little substance or credibility quickly became exhausting. Johnny Depp's performance is stand out. The rest of the cast is outshined by their costumes and makeup(Geoffrey Rush by his teeth). I could talk about the basic lack of interest created by expositions and explanations given for every motive... but I do enjoy pirates and the 18th century fare so I give it a 5/10. | 5 |
This is the best best thriller date and wow what a plot it is
No words just amazing | 10 |
The show looks nice but the story is rather cringe-worthy and repetitive. The whole plot is a collection of one stupid decision after another, by each family member, over and over again. Maybe the whole family should stay lost... | 5 |
Ignore the Critisim of Bengali people and Don't watch the Movie either because this god awful movie sucks. No proper story,Not enough characterization, Worst acting, Boring action scenes you don't even know why ur watching this film and what the plot is. This movie is so Yellowish that ur eyes start to burn. As a regular Movie watcher i recommend that do something else or read a book instead or Re-watch John whick but don't waste ur time like i did | 1 |
This film' is immense. The acting is refined (although Di Caprio may just be the weakest overall) and the overall quality of production is outstanding with attention to detail and loving flourishes that really are making Nolan's name. A special mention has to go out to Gordon Levitt who is really coming of age. His 3rd rock character is now definitely not hounding him anymore. When I saw the Matrix in 1999 I had no idea what to expect and it blew me away with its twist on reality and this is what Inception tries and fails to achieve. It is big but its not clever and it is clearly defining itself as a blockbuster but nothing more. The concept of a dream within a dream is OK but so meekly executed despite a strong script that I wonder how much dumbing down needed to be done to bring this film to the masses. It would seem that a good idea has been melted down to its lowest denominator so that it can appeal across generations but is that really the point of these type of films?
The base line has to be that when your dealing with a intellectual plot that needs to get people thinking the worst you can do is sign post it every two scenes just so the dimmest chump in the audience can join the dots. It is like Existenz but without a twist or Minority Report without the painful vision of the future. In short, this needed to assert its philosophical intentions more - there was simply nothing there to question and it certainly never made me feel like I possibly could be living in a dream. Now where's my totem?
I have also taken issue with my perceived lack of interest in the characters. The plot is so mundane that I can hardly see why these guys are so prepared to risk all to get it. Perhaps a more global plot which although cheesy may have added a little impetus to proceedings. I simply did not care whether they achieved their aims or not. I did not care that Mal was haunting Cobb or that Ariadne was even there. Talking about Ariadne, she was very reminiscent of the silly mechanisms Nolan used to drive 'The Dark Knight' forward and yet again he has lost a little of the magic. At least he is a visual genius.
Overall, I enjoyed looking at the film but I can't honestly say I really liked it. Nolan's flourishes and the sheer quality are everything I have wanted in a film but oh my there is a issue with plot sophistication here. It just needed to be a little smarter. | 7 |
Disregarding the fairly innovative SoMe-take on the film I don't understand the high score. It's an ok crime film with some nice twists, but the main twist is too sudden and short-lived, and I don't like the acting of the police officer (from Will & Grace). | 6 |
Subsets and Splits