Datasets:
getGO007
/
IMDbCollection

Dataset card Data Studio Files
xet
Community
1
Review
stringlengths
6
10.3k
Rating
int64
1
10
I've been watching anime since I was a kid, so I've seen plenty of different genres, and different stories. To have people put this on a 9+ rating is extremely overestimated. If I was to say why there is so much hype about One Punch Man simply it's the animation and the music that goes along with the fight scenes. As purely an action anime I would definitely recommend it, however the story is rather mediocre. Just a basic summary is you have an over powered hero who pretty much finishes every enemy with one punch, as the title says. I figured it would be pretty boring, but it was rather enjoyable at first, but eventually it lost its charm quickly. The fight scenes were still gorgeously animated but you already knew who was going to win the fight. It just adds such irrelevance to all the other characters, who lack character development pretty much completely. A lot of the anime lately has been trashy, and although this was one of the better ones of the year, it by no means deserves all the praise it's garnering, which is mostly likely due to the appeal it also has to the western audiences. To have this rated higher than shows like Fullmetal Alchemist Brotherhood, Cowboy Bebop, Samurai Champloo, as well as other anime's that exceed in several areas that this anime has completely fell flat on just doesn't make sense. Honestly don't get caught up in all the buzz, if you just want to watch an action show with a bland plot, by all means, it's at least worth watching if you have the time, but there are a lot of better shows out there.
6
Show was good in fact excellent but after Chevy Chase left I felt like it was missing something but after the departure of Donald Glover, I stopped watching it.
8
I was really disappointed in this movie the first time I watched it. So I gave it another go. And another one and another one until I understood what was going on. The film gracefully captures the desperation of people looking to survive. Watch it more than once. Matthew delivers a STUNNING performance.
7
What a great film. It's equal parts funny and dramatic. Every actor is so vibrant in their performances and the story knows how to be subtle while being almost larger than life. I adored Knives Out, and I also loved The Last Jedi, so in my eyes Rian Johnson is a director to watch out for. This film only serves to prove that idea right, because I can't think of one single thing that I didn't love about it. Benoit Blanc has become one of my favorite new film characters. He's so likable and charming, and the way the story comes to a head in the climax (and even during the "dinner scene, which was just a fantastic misdirection) really drives home just how GOOD he is.
10
This is a field guide on how to do a disservice to existing characters, forget what pacing and character arcs even are, cram twenty-two episodes' worth of themes and subplots into six (and fail to juggle them properly at that), write both ill-timed and unfunny humour for everything except the trailer, and bash everybody over the head with politics. The show could have been -- should have been -- so much more. The seeds for really good character beats and themes were in there, but ultimately ended up getting buried under the less-than-stellar elements. A real bummer for me, as I like Sam and Bucky... but only brief glimpses of them in their own show.
3
As someone who has read all the books and invested 700 hours into W3, i cannot stress how dissapointed i am by this show. The story is extremely rushed, characters are changed from a slavic medieval fantasy. As somebody from Eastern Europe, this is truly annoying. What is the reason for this? 1. Story is so rushed, i don't understand WHY. WHY do you make an adaptation of a famous series only to push your personal opinion and agenda in it? WHY not follow the books? They are awesome and yet characters were completely butchered. 2. Geralt and Jaskier are played very good, they along with Mousesack, Calanthe and a few others are the only decent ones. 3. Different Fringilla, different Triss / WHY? Fringilla never studied at Aretuza, is the cousin of Anna Henrietta, duchess of Toussaint. In the books she is basically Yennefer with short hair, that is why Geralt falls in love with her?. Why then? 4. Yennefer looks like a mad 15 year old. The actress that's playing her is trying her best, but her role is miscast. Yen in the books has a more mature role, she is smart and not some impulsive chick. Why does her character blame the world because she can't have children when SHE chose this knowingly? 5. Huge budget, huge dissapointment. Is it so hard to follow the books? WHY do you adapt them if you're gonna butcher them? I really tried to like it, the only points are for 3-4 characters but the others are horrible and the writing is subpar. Really dissapointed for a show with such a huge budget. Books - 10 Games - 10 TV series - 5 at best. Rushed story / Netflix does it again.
1
I can't say anything bad about both actors performance, to be honest. Both actors did great, BUT.. that's the only nice thing I have to say about this movie. I love a good black and white movie, but not every movie get's away with that. This was one of those movies. No good story or plot. Just a lot of random stuff put together in 1,5 hour of boredom.
4
How is this movie ranked so high ? This movie is horrible. The first one workedl ,but this one was not good at all.
1
I was very much into Venom back in the old Todd McFarlane days. This Hollywood take on the character was waaay to weak, and I don't think the director did a very good job of bringing Tom Hardy forth as Venom. He made it too goofy, where it should have dark and violent. There is violence, but it's too restricted, and a character like Venom calls for some R-rated gore. I wonder how they will deal with Carnage, as that guy is pure ultraviolence. As for entertainment-factor, I really tried to like it, but found myself bored and looking at the clock a bit too often. A few good ideas, but overall it was just too weak. And don't get me started on that Paw Patrol CGI. Time to step up the game, FX-people of Hollywood!!
4
Too much foul language for my liking, and the story wasn't up to much either
4
So I only got about 20 minutes in. I really can't stand movies where there are so many inconsistencies in filming that it takes away from any realism at all. If the car has been running into other cars and people and is all scratched up, why does it look new every other scene? If the driver is wearing a hat, why does it pop on and off every other scene? If there's blood all over people, why does it disappear every other scene? Couldn't get past this stuff to see if it was fun or not.
4
I have never fallen asleep in the cinema in my life! I thought this film looked pretty good and the cast was impressive, plus i loved the first 4 Batman films but i fell asleep like 20 minutes in and didn't wake till near the end. I guess i can't really comment but i think a movie that puts you to sleep that fast isn't worth spending money on. Plus the story was pretty awful the 'villan' was dumb and it just didn't have anything like the other films. I like the whole fantasy edge to Batman and the way the villains are formed (Joker with the acid, Catwoman with the cats etc) the film has none of this. The continuation from the original Batman was dumb as it was clear that the joker killed Batman's parents yet in this he does not? Basically save your money!
2
It's good to see a heroine in the saddle in a superhero movie for once, which is definitely to be applauded, and setting it in 1918 is a novel idea for a character created in 1942 (albeit the film's grasp of history is shaky, since Hindenberg is referred to by Dr Poison as 'von Hindenberg' while Danny Huston looks nothing like the original Ludendorff, although at least nobody calls him 'von' Ludendorff); and fun to see her charging across No Man's Land deflecting bullets from German machineguns. But it's the usual ponderous, overproduced hokum with CGI special effects that already looks dated, fussy steadicam photography, loud, obtrusive yet boring music by Rupert Gregson-Williams and - as usual - an interminable climax. I would have liked to have seen more of Robin Wright as Antiope, and considerably less of Chris Pine as Capt. Steve Trevor (with a name like that, obviously the hero, but a brash, obnoxious one, prone to unfunny wisecracks).
5
Was like a real carnage with the fast screenplay, on the point sequences, good action & VFX, the conflict between alien & human, the introduction of a new villain with a backstory was all so good and to the point, cannot ask for more but still felt like maybe there could've been some twists & turns with more surprise elements for much more engagement.
8
At the beginning, I had high hopes for the conjuring universe. However with each movie that gets run through the cookie cutter, those expectations have been crushed. I'm now without any sense of excitement that these movies should have been able to give me and those of us who love the chance to see great horror. It's not just this movie that has missed the mark, but the last several. Especially the Annabelle movies in particular. Why do they insist on throwing together a mindless exercise in lazy scares acted out by kids we have no reason to care for in any way? Instead we get Ed and Lorraine at the beginning for the minimum amount of time just to make sure we know it is a conjuring universe set up, just to see them conveniently depart until the very end. Nothing against the young actors, they are decent enough, but you always know they are never in any real danger whatsoever, because they don't kill the kids off in these movies, they always make it through unscathed. The outcome is always the same. So I say, just the adults for once, and leave us guessing right until the end who is going to live or die or worse. At least we have a chance to be surprised.
4
The worst written dialog I've seen in a long time.
2
Iron Man ranks as one of the best movies made about a Marvel superhero to date. It was going to be a difficult task following that up, no matter what, but a great sequel could have been made had they just taken the time to develop it. But no, money talks, so they rushed this sequel into production and what results is probably the worst of the Marvel shared universe films. That isn't to say it's not worth watching. It still has some good points and Robert Downey, Jr. is most of them. But it has more bad ones. It suffers from the same thing so many superhero movie sequels do. It feels like it needs to cram as many characters and subplots as possible into it. While not as bad as, say, Spider-Man 3 or the Schumacher Batman movies, it's still overkill. They should have kept things simple. Building towards future movies is fine but your first goal should always be to create a good movie that stands on its own. Downey is good, although other reviewers pointing out that sometimes he looks bored is a fair assessment. Mickey Rourke hams it up like you might expect him to. The biggest contribution this movie makes is the addition of Scarlett Johansson's Black Widow. Unfortunately, those who like her in the later Avengers or Winter Soldier will likely be disappointed at her performance here. The part isn't well-written and Johansson doesn't rise above the material given her. The rest of the cast is unimpressive. Particularly Don Cheadle, who replaces Terrence Howard as James Rhodes here. Not saying he does a bad job, just nothing that is noteworthy. Iron Man 2 is not a very good movie. It is watchable if you are a fan of the series or comic book movies in general. But it's a bit of a chore to get through for everybody else. Something I can't say for the other Marvel films to date.
5
3-Star for the amazing house and some of the cinematography, but nothing compares to the cinematography of some of the other epic films. The other 7-star for a film that's makes Dumb and Dumber and Mr Bean masterpieces.
3
Dont get me wrong i love DeNiro Pesci and Pacino as much as the next guy. This movie has a stellar cast. The movie has a lot of fun little historical references which is nice. It is just so incredible BORING. They talk ALL the time about litteraly nothing. I have NEVER wanted a movie to just end so much before. I mean kudos to the people who has the patience to see this. I think one needs to be a die hard gangster fan to enjoy this movie and I never want to see it ever again.
5
Has some funny jokes, but overall feels kind of tragic because the world building we see go on is pointless since everything is a joke. Why should I learn about the threat levels or heroes it's just a joke. If this was more serious I would've loved it because it sets up an awesome world with creative heroes. Have fun with it but just know you're going to be sad thinking about how good this show would be in a more serious setting.
7
I wouldn't normally be this unhelpful, but: Yawn. That's my full and in-depth review. If you do watch this movie you'll quite possibly do the same. If you really, really, insist though... you do? Really? OK. My reasons are: unbelievable scenario (though setting very believable), characters it's hard to feel any empathy with, unnecessary lampooning of the Japanese, no particular plot development, no real story. I watched this at home and was hard pushed to keep going after the first 40 minutes of tedium. The occasional witty exchange (ish) does not make up for the fatal flaws.
2
Every episode gives chills. I never expected a show to deliver these many plotwists. Death Note being my first anime, stays my favorite anime.
9
Great story and impressive performance by all the actors specially Saurabh Shukla who plays the negative role. The story inspires one to be honest and sincere while performing their responsibilities towards their country. The movie is inspired by real stories which makes it even more impactful. Overall, a must watch!
8
Season 1: 8/10 Season 2: 6/10 Season 3: Won't be watching The first season had a nice premise, with each episode telling a story which further enlightens us to the mystery of the 'Reasons Why'. Throughout the series, the stories were engaging, however one of the final 'Reasons' minimises the importance of the other 12 'Reasons', which left a slightly bitter taste in my mouth as I felt the momentum that the story built up was all for nothing. The second season is rather unnecessary. It takes the original premise of episodic reveals and tries to reveal more about Hannah's life as well as showing the emotional aftermath on the characters. However, the revealing stories were well covered in the first season, so much so that the stories in the second season either contradict some of the original 'Reasons' or are largely uninteresting. The emotional aftermath stories are filler and reflect a little too much of a change to the teen drama genre. The third season... well the cliffhanger of the second season and the reveals that Hannah's story is over means that the story is going to go fully into the teen drama genre and will just be another One Tree Hill. I'm not interested in this, so I won't be watching the series any further.
6
I have read book and TV series was ok but no more than that. The TV series makes some changes from King's novel and I do not understand why. There is an interesting character who plays a big role in the whole story in the book that I missed in the TV series and this made me feel disappointed.
4
Not only is the movie one of the best crime movies, but one of the best I've seen in a long time. The movie had a great story and the acting of the actors was great, especially the detective who played a great role in the movie. The movie was able to combine mystery, excitement and comedy wonderfully, and it was the beginning of the movie. The film is calm and casual, but the excitement increased with time, even in the middle of the film, which began here with enthusiasm and breath-taking. The interconnection of events with each other was very successful, and the ending was not the same as I expected, but it was satisfactory. In conclusion, the movie was excellent, and the negatives it contains can be skipped.
8
This was the second Marvel show that I watched, and I have to say, what an amazing show. First of all, the story and acting. The story is incredible, with stunning twists right at the first episode, and that isn't the last twist in the show. There are many twists that keep you on the edge of your seat from start to finish. The acting is amazing, with great performances from every actor. The visuals and CGI are amazing as well. Every location looks stunning and incredibly detailed. I obviously have to talk about the soundtrack - wow. Every song is filled with incredible arrangements and fusions of instruments. Overall, stellar show. I definitely recommend this show for any Marvel fan.
9
Having watched everything marvel has put out, this is by far the weakest and just uninteresting and confusing piece of work. The cast is amazing, they are known stars and masters of their craft, however the writing, the directing, screen plays, are all way off in a very jarring, time and space bending, way that provides little closure or explanation to the audience. I waiting until I finished the show before commenting because I was hoping for a massive turn about, but rather found myself watching the show simply to see each episode, and the show ( now season) itself end.
2
The story has low speed and boring on specific times. While it is based on real event, I guess it didn't need a miniseries and a long movie was enough. Cast are all good especially acts and Costume design. The ending was excellent as well.
4
I was excited to finally watch this movie as I do love the song from it and it's been hyped up a lot. I wanted to like it, but it was pretty boring. It took me hours to watch as I kept pausing it to go off and do other things as I kept getting bored. I'm not exactly prim and proper but there was a lot of swearing in this movie and it made me cringe. I just don't think it was all necessary. The acting wasn't bad and the storyline is good, it just fell a bit flat for me.
5
The movie is really funny and exciting! Many plots are full of creativity, and the lines are very styled! The special effects are also very good, and the charm of Chinese kung fu is so huge! The growth of the protagonist is like a salvation, giving the film more meaning. This is a great movie!
10
I was hesitant about THE DEATHLY HALLOWS at first. I was excited, yes, but reserved. David Yates kind of let me down with THE HALF-BLOOD PRINCE (my second least favorite) after liking THE ORDER OF THE PHOENIX (my second favorite up) so much. Mr. Yates, you've redeemed yourself. THE DEATHLY HALLOWS PT.1 is fantastic and is now my second favorite movie of the franchise. THE DEATHLY HALLOWS PT.1 carries the descending dark tone of the series further. This movie is filled with tension and dread throughout. From the get-go the stakes are high and emotion is flaring. The pre-title scene does an incredible job setting the tone for the rest of the film. I truly felt genuine sorrow for the characters, especially Hermione. The aspect of the film I really liked was the sort of genre switch from the previous films. It's still a fantasy film, but this one really feels like a horror movie at times. The way scenes are shot and set up there's a real nerve racking tension to every scene. And seeing these characters grow over 6 films the connection with them really draws a heightened sense of apprehension. Some scenes were so tense you could hear a pin drop in a sold out crowd. And the sweat on the character's forward was a visual representation of the audience's. The effects were incredible and seamless with the story. Probably the only thing that I really felt was fake was the snake in the beginning of the film, but other than that I bought every bit of visuals TDH threw at me. I'm EXTREMELY glad they didn't do this movie in 3D because I don't think the post-conversion 3D would have done any justice at all and would actually detract from the story. The movie is very dimly lit and with the light taken away with the glasses some scenes would have been nearly impossible to see what's going on if any dimmer. I hope they don't post-convert part 2. There's a fantastic animated sequence in near the beginning of the third act which is gorgeous. It serves as extra exposition but could really be considered a nice short film. It doesn't come off as forced or distracting in the slightest either. It could have been weird since there hasn't been anything like it in any previous installment of the series but actually fits in very nicely. There are some pretty impressive action sequences as well. All but one set piece were really well executed. The one set piece that kind of bothered me was the only real one that we see the entirety of. It's a chase through the woods and while it is very well shot most of the time, it has a few too many "Bourne shots" where the shaky cam moves around way too much. I understand that they're trying to put you there with the characters, but too much is too much. Aside from those occasional shaky cam shots -- which thankfully there aren't too many of -- the cinematography for that scene and all others are great. Only thing about most the action is that because the main characters were vaulted out of them so quickly, we don't actually see what happens. We get a taste, but the plate is passed along and we're onto the next entree. I can't fault the movie for this, in fact I actually have to give it a tip of the hat. Some of the bigger battle moments I'm sure would have been spectacular to see, but they would have dragged down the film since the movie is very story driven. While the series is now in a very dark place, it doesn't get overwhelming. It is extraordinarily uneasy at times and pretty dreadful, but it's got nice bits of very effect comic relief at key moments to lighten things up for some breathing room. The laughs thankfully don't feel at all force but rather very natural. They also really help with some pacing. Those quick moments of laughter fill in for some of the down time. I heard someone who saw an advance of the film say that they thought it was boring and slow. While I can't agree, I can see how he would think so. The film does swiftly exit almost every fight sequence and there is a lot of sitting around in the woods trying to decide what to do. There is a segment of the film where there isn't a lot going on, and people who aren't drawn into the story will be bored. TDH doesn't cater to non-fans. There's no flash backs, no retracing steps already taken, no "previously on" moments. If you've been following the movies then you're good, you don't have to have read the books (I haven't yet), but if you haven't paid attention in the previous films you may feel a bit lost. But that's the perfect way to go. This is the seventh film in a series, so making a movie for people who haven't enjoyed the first six would be a silly decision to make. Being a "Part 1" film, it does end on sort of an ellipsis. There is kind of a climax, but not really. It is kind of like KILL BILL VOL. 1 where right when the story gets to the "oh crap!" point you see "Directed by." It was to be expected. Being a two part finale to the biggest franchise of this era, they're making it as epic as possible. There's a lot of book to include in a single movie. It feels like they filmed one movie then cut it at the half way point. It's either going to make the audience feel ripped off or make the audience extremely anxious to see the final half. I didn't feel ripped off, I'm truly excited for the finale.
9
Better start for Indian TV series, There are more content in India that can be make better TV series. Waiting for "Mahabharat" It's better than game of thrones. We hope HBO or Netflix will make it.
8
I'll try and keep this shortish. For reference I think there are at least 3 films of 2019 that were better than parasite including 'Once Upon a Time in Hollywood', 'The Irishman', and 'The Joker'. If you're not the kind to often seek out great original content than I can imagine why you might think this movie is really some kind of unique, fresh gem. But there are too many plot conveniences and unrealistic character behaviors to really class this as "The greatest film of the decade". Not by a mile. Having said that I found the movie had several interesting threads and themes going on, some of which resolved, and some which were probably the most interesting went nowhere. ie the young 'rich' kids role, among other things. That was slightly disappointing. I think the so called 'class divide' commentary was there, but not to the extent that everyone raves. It showed more that there is not such a simple black and white difference between the two, which I appreciate. But I think the 'class divide' actually provided more a part of the organic scenery than a driving force of the film. Overall, I'm glad I saw it, but I would have rather just watched it at home, than paid to see it in gold class. Does that make me a bad person!?
6
I have always referring to imdb for reviews but never bothered to write one. This time however I had to write something because I couldn't read anymore the 10 star reviews. Either are fake or people have no taste at all. I was waiting for 3 months impatiently to watch the high budget take on GOT. Form the very first scene I realized that there was something wrong. As the first episode progressed I found it completely rushed and everything fake. The characters were over dramatic with zero talent. I couldn't connect at all. At times I felt like I was watching star wars in medieval times.It made no sense at all. I couldn't help myself but laughing like I was watching a low budget comedy. What a waste of money and effort. Absolutely rubbish.
1
To quote Keith Cohen: "Non-readers and Potter virgins will be frustrated and completely lost by the confusing story." Enough said. It is a movie that panders to the book readers. Yet for everyone else, potentially including those who have watched the other HP films as well, a lot of things are thrown by the wayside, such as character introductions, short goodbyes, and an ever-stalling narrative that falls in the middle of the too-long 2 1/2 hour screenplay. I also found the cinematography to be a bit analytic and less fluid, filling the movie with weird angles and drowning out the suspense. I thought the acting was pretty good, albeit the accents were rough. I also thought the visuals were spectacular and the sets were amazing. Knowing what the rest of the book entails from the point of stoppage, they could have added one or two more action scenes, since I feel like the last movie is going to be overflowed with those. But, overall, I enjoyed the dialogue and storyline, but some of the directing decisions I think were flawed. And in comparison to the rest of the film series, I think this movie is sort of a niche and is too far off from the others. It would be really hard to watch it in succession with the rest and keep the Harry Potter charm for non-book readers.
6
Must see this movie. It time worthy, bollywood great giod actors had done a good job and applause for anurag basu
10
Gawd, can I write 10 lines of text about this silly movie?.. I sure wanted to set the record straight, but 10 lines?.. I don't quite understand all the praise dedicated to this movie.. Sure it has fantastic cgi - which is why i gave it 5 stars - but that's about it.. The script and dialogue are crap and a huge let-down.. Is that how astronauts talk and behave like? Highly unlikely. And the never-ending progression of debris hailing upon our poor protagonists and triggering an impossibly increasing domino effect of, again, never-ending mayhem and destruction.. It should have been called Un-gravity, since the lack of gravity is the main protagonist here and taken to hollywoodian extremes. Cant these people write a good, believable script anymore? Or is the American public so brainwashed that only bullshit scripts work? Seems to be the case with most Hollywood productions these days. Disappointing. Enough dribble
5
If you appreciated Jon Favreau's Iron Man, then you'll love IM2. There's not much new on show, but once had a taste of what Tony Stark has to offer, you'll know what to expect. Although Robert Downey Jr.'s character thrives as a philanthropist and making the world a better place, unrest broods in the background. Two villains occupy Stark's attention. The maniacal Ivan Vanko (Rourke), who disproves Stark's theory that every country in the world is far behind his technology, and Justin Hammer (Sam Rockwell), the CEO of a competing weapons/defence manufacturer. The one that sways heads is Scarlet Johansson, the Marvel Universe's much needed heroine (sorry Pepper). Ultimately IM2 is only as strong as its hero, so pretty damn strong then. Having less superhero smash-ups and more human character development is attractive to comic- book fans and movie lovers.
7
This may as well be one of my favorite animes (though I don't watch that many to begin with). While the fanbase can be a bit much, the series itself is pretty, well, bizarre. It's a show that follows a protagonist (or in this case, protagonists) that all share one nickname, Jojo. Each part follows a different hero, and it gives itself a fresh start while also incorporating previous parts into its story seamlessly. The highlights of this show would definitely be the characters though. Each character has a distinct look that can be recognized by merely looking t a silhouette, and they all share various goals or ambitions that hook you in. And you can't talk about the show without talking about Stands. Stands are, in laymen's terms, a ghost that embodies the spirit of a person. Each stand represents their owner in one way or another, and gives extra info on them as a character. Through each part, you can see stands evolve in terms of ability and design. While Part 3 has a Knight stand that's main ability is its sword (and something about taking it's armor off to make it faster?). While another part, such as Part 6, has a stand that is able to unravel it's owner in string, as well as manipulate it's own body to her advantage. Overall, it's a pretty good series, and I'd recommend you go read some of the manga too, who knows when we're getting a Part 8 anime adaptation?
8
I get the feeling that Steve McQueen is still more of a visual artist than a storyteller, so that, for all the talent and craftsmanship on display, "Twelve Years" seems surprisingly detached and uninvolving. In the only scene that did connect for me, Solomon joins in, with increasing fervor, as his fellow slaves sing "Roll, Jordan, Roll" beside the grave of an old man who collapsed in the cottonfields, and here, I think, the effect may be the opposite of what McQueen intended as Solomon's steely stoicism gives way to something like Christian resignation. A low-key episode in which Solomon's logistic skills as a lumberman and raftsman, acquired as a free man in the North, excite the murderous envy of a white plantation carpenter seemed more effective than the expected lashings and lynchings and sexual exploitation. As with "Argo," another Oscar winner with "true story" origins, I was surprised by the way the script makes room for routine invented scenes (like the one in which a defiant Michael K. Williams is summarily killed off on board the steamship) while overlooking what seems like sure-fire plot material (the real Solomon was able to get a letter to his family from New Orleans, so they knew he'd been kidnapped but had no idea where he was). Later there's a scene in which Solomon takes a few steps off the path to the general store and immediately runs into the dreaded "paterollers" about to lynch two suspected runaways...Seems a bit coincidental; anyone know if that was in the book as well? Great performances, great cinematography, but in the end McQueen's chilly filmmaking style and John Ridley's uneven screenplay really blunt the impact of this powerful material.
7
Admittedly I did think this would be another Groundhog Day homage, and there have been many, but it was so original and well made. Nadia felt annoying from the start but she did grow on you and the depth of the character increased as the show went on. Same with her maturity. Cast, writers, directors and the rest of the crew made a gem here.
8
TVF has understood it's audience and has for some time been able to dig in content that the youth can gobble up, feel accepted and exclaim, "Waah, TVF!". From Kota Factory that presents the story of a IIT JEE preparation in Kota to its new series in Aspirants which presents the emotions of the candidates of one of the world's toughest exams - UPSC. It's a good premise and has been created with a flashback and back theme in which the story in both the time lines are driven by the other. The writing's crisp and the dialogues it entails are relatable. Music is apt and editing acceptable. Actors have done justice to the script. And the director has been able to string the story together for long enough to keep an average audience engaged. And for sure, a lot of hard work must have gone into it. So, it's commendable. The only thing lacking is the story. The story is dramatic but lacks emotion. TVF's Aspirants revolves around the theme of an exam but it doesn't convey the psychology of an aspirant or the society he or she survives. It fails to convey the situation's high stakes. It misses an opportunity to capture the frustrations, the anxieties, the depression and the constant fears of inadequacies and fears of non-acceptance that resides in an Indian child - no matter what or how much he or she achieves. It fails to mirror on the hypocrisy of a society which functions on the strength of a collective but shuns out any individual that doesn't meet the exceptional standards into oblivion. An education system which supports this regressive thinking of the society and kills dreams, aspirations and creativity of a child while marking their success or failure on parameters of numbers and putting hands up in case it breaks one into killing one self. And I know you can't make it all gloom and truth is stranger than fiction. But that should come as a disclaimer, else our short sighted, low attention, victimised youth will take it as a whole truth, which it clearly is not. TVF have missed an opportunity here but who cares, what matters is that the content sells and they are deservedly on route to getting 10M subscribers. So, Dear Reader, I would recommend this series only as a passing view or may be when you have time to kill but if not, may be pick up a book and give it a miss. Also, if you are enticed by the IMDB rating, and see 9.5+, understand that this is an inflated rating by an emotional Indian audience and is not a barometer for the significance or quality of the art presented.
6
... or high, or both. Boring, pointless, childish: practically Michael Bay at it's "best".
1
The trailer which was so hyped was nothing but just a mix of bikinis on beach and double meaning talks. I already knew that the film would be bad but I had to see it because of peer pressure. Moving on to the film, I found nothing good in the film. There were scenes inserted in such a way that it looked that the editor did not even cared to know the story. Film like this made me feel low of Bollywood. There are certainly good films but how can someone fall this much low as to make a film like this. The most important thing that has to be seen in a film is a story and I am ashamed of saying that the film lacks every bit of it. I am so sad Imtiaz Ali came up with this crap. Even an amateur viewer can identify the flaws of editing here and there. The director has to know that just because you shoot a film in London, showing pubs and glamorous body of the actresses is not at all tolerated in India now. I just cannot understand as to how hard is this to understand. However I am happy to say that there was a moment in the film when I felt good about the direction and character development. It was the time when the two girls met and started living together. But sadly that thing was for 5 minutes and after that it was just a show of deepika's body. Now if I may comment on ACTING than anyone could easily guess that saif is one overacted fellow in the film. Because of films like these I always have a hesitation to watch Hindi films. However the acting of Deepika was awesome and this is the first time I have liked her acting. Also Diana was good considering her first time. Overall this film is again the same repetition of bollywood's mindless work. "Please do not see or you are at your risk."
1
First fictional horror series with children leads, and they nailed it. I must say the leads have done their job like adults. What made my mind to change the rating from 10 to 9 is second season, because it wasn't as great as first season but still cast did their best. I'll give this series the rating of 'very good' not more than that. The direction of the series is great and so as the screenplay. But it would've been great if character 'Eleven' has more dialogues because fans would love that. Till now it's a piece of work that needed to be appreciated hope they would do great in further coming seasons. And seeing forward the character 'Eleven' with more dialogues on screen. This is something which have their leads who are still kids and series is rated not to be watched by kids.
9
It's set from the 1950s to the 1980s in the United States and Vietnam and is loosely based on the 1986 novel by Winston Groom. It follows the life experiences of a man with an IQ of 75 who seems to be on the edges of many major events. As a child, Forrest Gump (Michael Conner Humphreys/Tom Hanks) has a curved spine and is put into leg braces as a corrective. Unfortunately, his low IQ and braces make him the target of abuse by other children except for the girl that becomes his only friend and life-long love interest, Jenny Curran (Hanna Hall/Robin Wright). Forrest's mother (Sally Field) runs a boarding house and is endlessly supportive of Forrest. When young Forrest sheds his braces while running away from tormenters, he learns he can run very fast. This ends up getting him a football scholarship and a college degree. He then is drafted and ends up in Vietnam, where his best friend is an African American, Bubba Blue (Mykelti Williamson). He also greatly admires Lieutenant Dan Taylor (Gary Sinise). Bubba sells Forrest on shrimp fishing as a career, and they agree to work together after the war. However, Bubba is killed, and Lieutenant Dan is seriously wounded. Nevertheless, Forrest wins a medal for heroically saving several of his comrades. Meanwhile, Jenny, who was sexually abused by her father, has gone completely counter-culture. She and Forrest intersect from time to time, but she always disappears back into her world as Forrest keeps brushing greatness as he marches through his life. What can one say about this unique movie? First, it makes great use of special effects, leading to hilarious scenes like Forrest tipping off the authorities about the Watergate break-in or Forrest showing Lyndon Johnson on national TV the injury to his buttocks that earned Forrest a Purple Heart. Indeed the special effects are what is memorable about the movie. Without them, the movie would never have made the impact it did. The love story between Forrest and Jenny is melancholy but feelgood in its own way. The relationship between Forrest and Lieutenant Dan is fairly predictable. The humor sprinkled throughout enhances the experience.
7
After it ends, you're left wondering about so many things. Things that don't make sense scientifically, things about why people did certain things, things about why things turned out the way they did because they just don't make sense. It's an interesting concept, and the acting was pretty good, but the number of threads that they just cut is ridiculous.
5
What's positive: Tom Hardy is perfect for the role and gives a great performance. Venom's appearance and powers are faithfully adapted. An extreme improvement over the Spider-Man 3 (2007) version of Venom who didn't look like Eddie Brock or Venom. What's negative: This movie was made by a director and studio guys who a.) don't care much about the source material, b.) don't understand the source material and c.) are driven by greed. A Venom movie done right would be R-rated, because Venom is no hero, but he is very dark and kills a lot of people. Also it would have Carnage as the antagonist, because this is the best and most iconic villain. There would be no forced comedy and no forced romance. The Venom movie we got: In short: Greedy studio and bad director show what's wrong in Hollywood: PG-13, forced comedy, forced romance, hyper editing and everything as big as possible. This movie is not as bad as garbage like Fantastic Four (2015). It has good aspects, but it could be so much more.
2
This movie has thrilled to a lot of people, in case, I saw a good movie, but not good enough, normal, I am so sure i will not see it again, i must admit it has a great edition and music
6
It's ok. played out apocalypse theme already. For me the best thing is how good Sandra looks for her age.
5
This is an interesting show, but I'm finding it very hard to follow. It jumps time frequently and it took me a while to figure out that was happening. I can't keep any of the names and places straight, not sure they were introduced well enough. Not sure what people in the reviews are talking about with comparing it with Game of Thrones and it's nothing like it. Meh, it's interesting and done well, but nerdy-complicated that makes a person lost as to what's happening.
7
Nothing even comes closer to Avatar . Hollywood did injustice when they made a crapper of movie. But all in all, this show rocks. This is not just for kids. Any one can enjoy this show. This has all the elements such as comedy, drama, emotion and world class animation, specially the last episode
10
On the surface, the new Netflix original series "Stranger Things" is a science fiction/paranormal thriller set in a small 1980's suburban town where a group of kids and others confront mysterious and terrifying forces. However more importantly, this series is a marriage of elements from classic Spielberg and Stephen King, and acts as a love letter to 80's cinema. Direct or subtle references are made to "The Thing", "Halloween", "It", "The Goonies", "Stand By Me", "E.T.", "Carrie", "Jaws", "The Shining", "Poltergeist", "Evil Dead", and possibly even more films that I did not recognize. Combining these clever homages to classic cinema with incredible pacing, cinematography, soundtrack, and performances makes this series one of my absolute favorites. I highly recommend giving this series a look even if you don't understand the many homages and references just because of how well this show is directed. I would even describe the small town setting, mysterious antagonistic forces, dramatic pacing, and desperate investigation for truth as a more easily digestible form of True Detective season 1, another absolute favorite of mine. Another comparison likely to be made is to J.J. Abrams "Super 8", however the narrative similarities are simply due to both of these works accomplishing the same thing, giving an appreciative and nostalgic nod to Spielberg's classic work. If I had to choose some weaker elements of "Stranger Things", I suppose they would be predictability in the plot and lack of complexity in the dialogue. TLDR: I loved it, definitely give it a shot
9
"Taxi Driver" (1976) is a seminal psychological thriller directed by Martin Scorsese and written by Paul Schrader. Set in the gritty streets of New York City, the film follows Travis Bickle, a disturbed and alienated Vietnam War veteran portrayed by Robert De Niro, as he descends into a spiral of paranoia, violence, and obsession. De Niro's performance as Travis Bickle is haunting and mesmerizing, capturing the character's inner turmoil and simmering rage with raw intensity. The film's exploration of loneliness, alienation, and urban decay resonated deeply with audiences upon its release and continues to be relevant today. Scorsese's masterful direction, coupled with Schrader's insightful screenplay, creates a tense and atmospheric portrayal of a man on the brink of madness. The film's iconic imagery, including Travis's iconic "You talkin' to me?" scene, has become ingrained in popular culture and remains indelible in the minds of viewers. "Taxi Driver" received critical acclaim upon its release, earning four Academy Award nominations, including Best Picture and Best Actor for De Niro. It has since been hailed as one of the greatest films ever made, praised for its bold storytelling, powerful performances, and haunting depiction of urban alienation. As a searing character study and a commentary on the darker aspects of society, "Taxi Driver" continues to captivate and disturb audiences with its unflinching portrayal of one man's descent into madness.
6
I don't just get this movie. A sexually frustrated woman sees a human-like beast and chooses it as the solution to her unhappiness. I enjoyed the acting but the story is just so weird. So if aliens ever existed, will it also be cool to copulate with them? The motive is just not convincing enough.
2
It is absolute garbage. It is boring. It is stupid. It is annoying. It is nonsensical. It is complete, abysmal, unwatchable trash.
1
I dont really get what everybody likes about this movie. More than three hours of old man talking about gangster thing's plus some murders. That's it.
4
Those unfamiliar with this film may draw comparisons to the "American Pie" series but that would be inaccurate. This is a film that, despite the immature exterior, actually has some substance. Also, it's way funnier than those films and doesn't rely on cheap titillation for its appeal. The script is awash in expletives, like Kevin Smith with Tourette's. However, behind the pervasive crudeness there's an inventive story that will keep you entertained with all of the twists and turns that it throws at you. There's even an actual point to the story, neatly wrapped up in the closing scene. Not your usual sex comedy, to be sure. Jonah Hill and Michael Cera have excellent chemistry together and can also carry the story on their own when called upon. Also particularly memorable are the police officers played by Seth Rogen and Bill Hader. There are no mis-steps in casting, which is a 'make it or break it' area for any comedy. I can't recall much that was noteworthy about Greg Mottola's direction but there were a few nice touches. The soundtrack, on the other hand, is a real high point. It's filled to the brim with vintage funk and rock, well-chosen throughout. But the most important thing about this film is that it's often hilarious. That a teen-oriented comedy would appeal so much to an adult like me is something that I didn't foresee. Chalk that up to the great performances and inventive script.
8
Kate swindler is excellent in this and it's worth watching for her performance alone. The case is intriguing and you are kept interested throughout the series.
8
The second half of the season left me cold, just mehh. It's good but no where near a masterpiece everyones was saying.
8
I'm 66 and have heard about about the actual Dunkirk throughout my life. I heard nothing but good to excellent reviews and went to see it yesterday with high anticipation. I was 1 of only 3 people in the theater. As I watched I kept waiting for excitement and story to develop. - It never did. Throughout I felt like leaving but kept thinking soon the real entertainment would begin. - It never did. This movie barely resembled anything I ever read or saw concerning the evacuation of Dunkirk. The person I went with gave it a (-2). The movie had confusing characters and scenes. If you want to see a good representation of Dunkirk see "World At War" - episode 4 - ALONE.
1
Warning: I'm a German-Pakistani / Poor English Abnormally, i'd generally like to experience remade flicks. More so the if i loved the original. I know there are extremely few which equals or excels to the original but it's not a big problem for me 'cause i don't even expect them to. It is to me like a bonus track of a beloved album, no more no less. So i got no hesitation in checking Thor as well (i was even excited actually) 'cause the original MR India must be in my all-time best 10, but, oh my.. I won't say any more about this XEROX COPY crap. (copied on retarded machine, moreover) Nough said by nough people. Now one thing i just can't believe is how this could be legal. As far as i've read on internet articles, Marvel and his people haven't even paid a penny to the original Mr India estate, a comic that first appeared in the 1900s makers for doing this, which means Thor is not an official remake of Mr India. Then what the h..! is Thor's identity? Some's gonna say it's JUST BASED ON or INSPIRED thing but you know it's way beyond those kinds. Then what? Sort of Homage thing ? Yea possible, but Marvel and his company have hardly mentioned about the original on either official ads & reports or non-official comments. Instead, Marvel's kept saying he's got a bit INSPIRED ONLY and Thor is totally different from Mr India or something like that. Besides, more importantly, while shamelessly copying scenes-by-scenes from Mr India, Marvel intentionally missed the KEY-POINT of Mr India's story for his own audiences' taste, for COMMERCIAL PURPOSE in other words. Then how can we call it Homage anyway ? My conclusion is : Thor is not only a copy crap, it's rather A CRIME, LITERALLY. I don't understand why Oldboy makers let them make money with this stolen thing. Am i disappointed ? No i'm fine i didn't even expect. I'm just p***ed and upset for this shitmakers' shamelessness that's all.
4
I was holding out hope that one of my favourite book series would really be given the tv series it deserves. Season 1 was totally pulled oblong by Cavil, but season 2 is definitely getting better. Between the books, PS games and the tv series, it's best not to compare the story lines as you can get super confused🙃
9
The action and sex(y) scenes are too adult for kids, but the story is too silly for adults. A film that gets caught in a no-man's land of violent childishness, where Americans decide who's good or bad and go around killing them in elaborate missions. It passes the time if you're bored, but certainly not something to make time for.
4
A fantastic experience! A superb portrayal of the Great War. A trully masterpiece that deeply depicts the horrors of war. Though the movie has its flaws (yes it has!) Sam Mendes and Roger Deakins managed to create a classic.
6
Although Spider-Man is my favourite Marvel character, having grown up on the cartoons as a kid, alongside The Incredible Hulk, the first movie didn't get me up that much. This second movie, however, has me totally taken. It's rock solid stuff. The acting is top notch, the special effects, though obviously fake, is absolutely breath-taking and the drama is completely captivating. I recommend this movie highly.
10
As said above, this show is the most incredible show ever screened on television. It's more than just a show: If you get engrossed in it enough, it can change your life. Me? I live, breathe and sleep the show, because it is so extraordinary. There are many reasons as to why this is. I'm not going to go into any spoilers, so it may be a little vague, but it is fair to say that Jack Bauer (Kiefer Sutherland) IS 24. Every scene he is in makes you want to watch and stay watching. He is so utterly believable in every scene, he is made for the role as Jack Bauer. The fact that everything is meant to happen in one extraordinary (but totally plausible) day means that as every hour goes on and the situation deepens, you are rooting for him so much. In some episodes the endings have left me feeling numb and wondering what on earth to do with myself, as some of the things are so incredible to watch. It isn't just Kiefer that carries the show, far from it: The supporting cast is incredible: Tony, Mason and Palmer are amazing characters, and the main villain in series 3 is the best bad guy i have ever seen. any thoughts that the show would be stretched as the series' grow due to its format are misguided. somehow the show remains literally edge of the seat stuff with some amazing twists, turns and emotions, yet remains entirely believable. watch it. your life, like jack's, will never be the same again.
10
If this were the first film of it's kind, it would still be unoriginal. The unseen monster is not a new idea in story telling, nor is having no ultimate meaning or purposeful intent. There are no spoilers here, that's the conceit. We can retitle this "Don't look Mrs. Lot". Let's consider the qualities of the films makeup: 1. cinematography is adequate, like the work of a cameraman who has made films for television with limited resources. The multitudes of closeups and quick edits obscure the lack of uninteresting scenes, a trick borrowed from low budget television. I think the TV series "Lost" had better photography. 2. The sound is actually high fidelity. That said, it plays with the same intensity as it did in the last ten thousand horror films. It acts as a cover for dead scenes and pablum dialogue. In short, unoriginal. 3. The acting, which has been hailed as fantastic, is true hack work. Bullock and Malkovich could have phoned it in. Hack: "A cheap, mediocre, or second-rate practitioner, especially in the fields of literature and the arts". I would have preferred unknowns with potential, than reprisals of every character these two have played before. It must have taken them minutes to prepare for their roles. 4. The worst part is the story, dialogue and screenplay. Josh Malerman's book wasn't even that good to start with. The "Bird Box" was a first novel by a rock musician. Go figure. As I've said, the premise is unoriginal, the characters are thinly drawn, and the dialogue is just lubrication for a rusty script. "Hold on, hold on,. . . hold on . . . jump please . . . jump . . . over here girls, " You get the picture. Overall, the comparisons to M. Night Shyamalan's "The Happening" are apt. It's equally drawn out and unsatisfying in the end. There is no there there. . . Comparisons to "The Quiet Place" are unfair. The "Quiet Place" was far more engaging, had solid cinematography and a very original soundtrack to instill fear. Though that film wasn't too deep either, it's portrayal of family bonds and the fall of humanity were at least touching. In contrast, here we root for many of the annoying characters to die. Lastly, there are alot of shill reviews about this movie. Shill: "an accomplice of a hawker, who acts as an enthusiastic customer to entice or encourage others". The glowing reviews appear canned and absurd, even if they enjoyed it as film fodder, their one paragraph enthusiasm is clearly insincere. I encourage you to be harsh in your ratings to counteract this ploy to raise this films overall score. In the end, this horror film is a simulacrum: "an unsatisfactory imitation or substitute". Example: The "Bird Box" is a bland simulacrum of an original horror story. This might has well be likened to a modern ghost story, with an unseen entity from beyond, not knowing where it came from or what it wants. Meh . . .
1
Black Panther fails to execute an interesting plot idea. While the movie looks breathtaking, it is nothing short of a mashed up pile of disgraceful failed attempts at a superhero movie.
4
I remember watching this show when I was a kid, and I used to midly enjoy it (meaning if it was on, I'd watch it but if it wasn't, I wouldn't be upset about it). I recently decided to re-watch it cause I thought it would be nostalgic and bring back memories for me. I was disappointed when I watched almost the first two seasons, and realised how bad the show actually was. The animation style is good, and the story is also pretty good, but for some reason, watching it felt like a chore and even though I tried to force myself to watch it, I couldn't because of how boring it was. No hate to ATLA fans because I know how hyped up people get about the show, but it just wasn't it for me.
2
This movie offends me on such a fundamental level that I wanted to give it a 0. But then I remembered some truly bad movies where it's obvious that none of the screenwriters, directors, or actors involved was actually making an effort. In my opinion, these are the kind of movies that deserve a zero score. In the case of Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, it is clear that some of the creative personnel behind it were genuinely, and dare I say with great (albeit misguided) artistic passion, sensibility and integrity, trying to express something through it. That's why I gave it 3 stars, for effort. The reason I didn't like this movie is not because I found it confusing - I understood the plot perfectly, nor is it because I cannot suspend belief for a sci-fi twist - I've enjoyed many a sci-fi and fantasy movie in the past. What irks me the most is the kind of movies that present a sci-fi or fantasy premise, and then do not build on the premise in a logical or consistent way. Of course, some leeway and artistic license are always allowed, or even welcome, since movies sometimes can't and shouldn't be research-paper accurate. But if a movie veers too far away from logic and reason, without utilizing absurdity or parody as a deliberate artistic treatment, then it is just plain pointless and obtuse. And this is a movie that takes itself seriously. The problem is, if one is to entertain, somewhat seriously, the possibility of highly precise selective memory erasing technology, then the least interesting aspect would be to use it to salve relationship pains. Governments and secrets services would go crazy for this kind of technology for espionage, mind control, loyalty conversion, airtight non-disclosure procedure, and a million other usage scenarios. And people would freak out over the enormous ethical issue of invading the sanctity of one's mind. The only imaginary situation where such technology would be even remotely considered suitably justified would be to treat extremely severe case of PTSD, schizophrenia or depression perhaps. The world as we know it simply wouldn't be the same with this premise. To even suggest the idea that people would willingly erase their own memories just to alleviate romantic woes is an insult to the audience's intelligence. Imagine going into a movie knowing its premise revolves around a time machine that normal people could use for a fee, then finding out in this fantasy world, all the people only want to use the time machine to re-freeze their melted ice-cream, and nothing else. If it's a skit in a comedy, it might be funny. But this movie seems pretty serious about itself, which just makes it look like vacuous nonsense.
3
I'm in absolute disbelief at all the 10/10s this is getting.. it's like the director wanted to make an abstract art piece instead of a movie, here's a honest review. Acting: Absolutely strange as hell characters and with an amazing cast I get let down constantly because you cant do a good job of crazy, boring and slow characterization. Cinematography: For a movie this has horrible camera work. I hate the ol shaky camera shot, its awful. The shots are all just the same close up, mid shot and long shot all shaky. Story: Now here's where it gets.. not juicy, not anything at all. An absolute bore of a storyline that's kinda confusing but even when you get it, it's nothing interesting at all just a slow boring and crazy relationship between two people, with some "the 6th day" vibe going on. Summary: I absolutely love jim Carey and 99% of his movies but this one is on another level. Such a boring and dorky storyline I couldn't even finish it and stopped 3/4 way through. So yes I would highly suggest you do not watch this movie and have no clue why its rated anything above a 3 at all. Can I erase my memory of this movie just like jim?
2
It's like a cross between Bwitched, Pleasantville and the Truman show. Only 2 episodes in and wondering what's going on.
8
Highly recommend this masterpiece. Cannot understand the low ratings, must be highborn people who do never agree with the peasants. *sights* .
10
Screenplay, cinematography, photography and sound mixing are beautiful, but the story is just too messed up for me. It wasn't worth it, I wanted to leave the theater but kept waiting for the movie to make sense. Well, it didn't. I had to watch a review explaining the ending bcs apparently many mortals, such as myself didn't get it.
5
Without a doubt, one of the best films of all time. As far as crime drama/mobster genre goes, it starts and ends with this masterpiece. Period
10
I'm 1.5 hours in and the best I can say, having read the book, is they threw darts at the book and collated the struck parts into a movie. Good to see Malkovich but Bullock, who can be good, was laughable at exuding insouciance at life. Rent if you must, don't buy it. Hopefully they won't do the same (if the book gets adaptedj with the sequel, "Malorie".
3
Waste of time. Just don't be fooled by the actors. It's a humiliation of movie production. Lots of lies and no sequences are correct. O feel pity for chris. He should not sign this kind of low budget. Netflix is no good .
1
Its Actually A Nice Series to Watch out. All actors working Good 👍🏻.
7
This is basically a remake of the far superior Barbra Streisand version with a few little tweaks and changes but it relies heavily on the aforementioned. They did a clever job hiding Lady Gaga's so-so acting capabilities by cutting away from the heavier emotional sheets and using a lot of wide shots. Her scene in the bathtub is downright awkward and I found myself almost laughing out loud at her delivery. Incredibly overrated. There were obviously incentives given for the over the top reviews it received.
2
Absolutely terrible. Complete waste of two hours. Here's the whole movie to save you time... Remove one of your senses (vision) survive in a world where some mystical creature is trying to kill you. Magically make your way down and river to freedom. The end.. This is horrible
1
I usually don't write reviews, but the need to give this series one is big. One of the best and impressive series i have watched!! Only thing that would make it a 10/10 = Russian.
9
I wanted to like the movie so much. I thought to myself 'this movie got 7 Oscars, it has to be somewhat good'. Turns out the only thing that can be considered "decent" are the visuals, and even there, not everything is top-notch. Let's get the worst out of the way really quick: the horrible story. What a mess. Constant logic gaps bigger than the grand canyon, mediocre acting and hideous dialogues. It really is *not* a good story at all, whatsoever. At no point in the movie did I feel any connection to the characters. That wouldn't be so awkward if I didn' clearly notice that there was supposed to be drama, and there was supposed to be tension, but it jsut didn't work for me. Camera work on the other hand is great. A lot of extensive scenes with no cuts make it almost feel like a one-take, especially because the few cuts are placed very smart. Effects are... well... digital. Not to say that this is a bad thing, but a lot of the effects look pretty ridiculous in comparison to Interstellar which was released only a year later. Nontheless, the effects and camera work is what made me watch the movie until the end. It's all I will have a positive memory from with Gravity.
5
It's a good movie mixing in 4 different stories and how Fate brings them 'together'. The movie brings up Fate, Destiny and the Dichotomy between 'Good' & 'Evil' in it's philosophical themes. I liked it. Another good movie in Anurag Basu's Filmography.
8
If you read or heard the audio book, you may faintly recognize this movie as a completely condensed, misaligned sketch of the actual story. The one good thing they left out of this movie was the irritating, recipes at the end of every chapter. It was like a Food Network sponsored thriller. This should have been a two or three part mini-series in order to capture the depth of these characters and the intricacies of the story. Without including spoilers, it is important to note that there many aspects of the book that have been changed or left out that are significant enough to make this some sort of an alternate universe version of the book instead of something edited for running time in a theatrical film. I know the written story, and still had some trouble understanding what the film was trying to establish. For someone who has no idea about the book, I would imagine this would look like a hastily edited, hash of a movie with no real connection between the characters or richness to the intrigue, which is exactly what it is. The standard violence, nudity and language are about on par with the book, with a slight edge to the book on excessive graphic language and in depth descriptions of sex and violence. I didn't hate it, but knowing what it didn't do and how it might have been better presented made it a 5/10 for me... and that's including one point for not putting those damn recipes in the film.
5
Everything one would expect from a superhero film with kids and a PG-13 rating.
6
It is a straightforward story with only one subject. Audience is equally in the dark alongside the subject with what's going to happen next. That's the idea of direction which is a great work. A simple story presented in a mysterious manner. That said, the continuous camera sequence is a great deal of editing but it's missing the continuous flow of sound, background sound so to say, which is equally important. It is 1917, not 2017 where trucks can be electric and soundless. Those are army trucks from WWI. When a subject is grieving on his mate and suddenly there are two other army personnel appear in the scene out of nowhere, and the next thing you see is a line of army trucks loaded with army personnel, question is, when they were getting closer to that location where the subject was, where is the sound of those trucks appearing closer and more so, of all those personnel?! Also, continuous camera flow is not required everywhere. To me, it's basically waste of some seconds, for example, where camera also moves into the truck along with the subject. Nonetheless, it is indeed a great camera editing especially all the water scenes including the small pond with dead bodies as well as waterfall scene with the river, overall a beautiful cinematography. Quite gripping to watch this film except that it could have been much better with the flow of missing important background sound. Rating: 6/10
6
When it came out it seemed cool and nice-and I was a fan. But rewatching - I find this insufferable. Other than a couple of good cases - most of this series is needlessly slick, trying to be cool and just wants to be much smarter than it is. Cumberbatch is good - but then he gets very repetitive with his fast monologues. Freeman does a good job of looking like he has stomach issues throughout the series. So many plot holes that one can drive a whole posse of trucks through it. A series that quickly degenerated into something that fans would put together, rather than something put together by thoughtful screenwriters and people that know what they're doing. Yes, they enjoyed tremendous success - but it is a load of tripe.
1
Of course the content is hard to watch as this film doesn't shy away from depicting the brutal violence of slavery. But it's a well done film and an important topic and the performances are incredibly powerful.
8
There are many unpredictable forces out there, and it's not really worth risking and challenging the supernatural. If you were to define "Talk to Me" as a horror movie, I gotta say I'm a bit disappointed. There aren't many truly spine-chilling scenes, and for me, it's more of a film about paranormal and mental twists. From the supposed possession and strange occurrences around the protagonist to them feeling like they're possessed themselves, it seems like they didn't really emphasize the ghost's power or a revenge plot. Kinda unfortunate, in my opinion. The Meg 2 playing at the theater next door is actually more enjoyable. The sound effects alone make it much less dull.
5
Most people who watched the first movie could have at least guessed the storyline of the second, 20 years ago. The dialogue is probably dated three years before the first movie, and makes 1950s movies sound contemporary. The only thing that saves the movie is the music. Why make something so predictable? There isnt one surprise or twist or intriguing detail or thread. Even the visuals aren't new? Yet another film where everyone is a secret super hero, flying planes, sailing boats, riding bikes, cars etc. Hollywood hasn't any ideas anymore.....it gave up on new ideas 40 years ago. This film is the pinnacle of the final drop.... Hollywood is dead.
2
What a beautiful story. I promise this content will blow your mind. You will learn a new definition of love.
10
Didn't care for the first 3 episodes but it gets better with episodes 4, 5 and 6. I give the whole season a 6 minus. episode 1 is about social media. I absolutely hated it. Community did way better with a lot more satire in the 8th episode "App Development and Condiments" of season 5. episode 2 didn't feel like a black mirror episode and the lead is so annoying it's painful to watch. Then things start to get better with episode 4 and finished grandiosely with features length episode 5. TL;DR : skip episode 1-3 and watch'em letter if you get bored.
6
This show started off well enough... A little backstory between Hannibal Rising and red Dragon, some halfway decent phsycho-thriller feel, and some interesting plot twists. Then it got super campy. And then it got super weird and actually surpassed its previous almost excusable gore with pointless greusome bloodlettinginute by minute. This is one of the few shows that actually turns me off, not because it's too bloody, or too risqué, or too psychedelic, but because it's too EVERYTHING. By the time we get to Season 3, the producers just decided to pull out all the stops and save no shockers for later. It's a dump truck of guts, sex, drugs, and obscurity. Completely beyond reason. Absolutely devoid of any redeeming qualities by the end. Seven more episodes to go and my eyes couldn't roll any harder.
3
Good storyline and natural acting, but the directing is outstanding! Though you know where most of the green screen are, you soon forget it's not actually in the mis 60's. The outdoor scene's are simply godfather like.
8
This was very interested. Started off very slow, was a bit confused as to where it was going to go. Somehow kept me hooked with the old school sitcom esk episodes. Nice to see Scarlett Witch and Vision together as they have good chemistry. Like I said it was interesting, definitely some good scenes such as when the main characters argue and have a brief stand off towards the end of the show. Definitely worth the watch. I'd come back to watch a few episodes, others were disposable. Although it was just an average show, it was different and I like that.
7
I felt the storyline was weak. Some scenes were funny, but the 8+ rating certainly feels like too much. It is either due to the popularity of the two stars or baby boomers appreciating the nostalgic effect of the movie's time period. Sorry!
5
Confused by all of the praise heaped on this shockingly standard zombie apocalypse story? Well, that makes at least two of us. There is nothing original here to note and nothing that hasn't been done better in the countless Romero knock-offs that have seem to have infected everyone's taste lately. I assume much of the appeal comes from the gun-crazy survivalist camp that know nothing about "Lone Wolf and Cub" and have no patience to read "The Road." "LOU" isn't as good as either, nor is it really even a mediocre Romero clone. There's some nice window dressing - particularly an unmasked Pascal, a tragic arcade date, and a brief Offerman interlude - but if "The Walking Dead" hadn't already exhausted these already exhausted storylines it might be easier to overlook the show's frequent reliance on genre tropes. It's sincere enough, and somehow that makes it all the more cynical.
6
"Oppenheimer" disappoints with lackluster cinematography, bland dialogue and a poorly written screenplay. The visuals lack depth, leaving viewers detached, while wooden dialogue fails to engage. Moreover, "Oppenheimer" perpetuates the narrative of male hegemony, while women appear briefly and unnecessarily naked on screen. The narrative lacks cohesion, with scenes disjointed and poorly connected, leaving viewers struggling to follow the story's progression. Characters often behave in inexplicable ways, leaving audiences perplexed and disinterested in their fates. From the sluggish pace to the monotonous dialogue, every aspect contributes to the overwhelming feeling of boredom. Unfortunately, it falls short of being a compelling cinematic experience, leaving viewers counting down the minutes until the credits roll.
2