Review
stringlengths 6
10.3k
| Rating
int64 1
10
|
|---|---|
We are not fans of this Spider -Man franchise. We did honestly try to be. And we have nothing against the fantasy per se. It's just that this is boring.
| 6
|
The movie has some pretty good action scenes especially the first car chase scene with the running cam was great. Other than that even the last fight scenes were just gun fights which are more like a shooting game and doesn't leave much impact. Chris Hemsworth is good. In the end another action flick which could have been done so much better.My rating is 6.7 to be precise.
| 7
|
I do not understand how so many people think that this is an intelligent art movie in the review section. There is no structure, coherence and a conceivable tone in this picture. I actually do like "bad movies" or even "b movies" however, this movie is not bad; this is extremely dull, cringey and pretentious... It is so apparent that director coppied so many elements from Northern European cinema culture like the faded cinematic colors, particular style of the sweather that Jim Carrey wears, european cars like volkswagen beetle. However, in the end it is not a European movie it is not a Hollywood movie or it is not a unique picture from a less-known director. It is just a movie that did not give me anything but unbearable 1 hour 45 minutes.
| 1
|
I'm not sure when this began but too many people/reviewers are giving movies great ratings that would never have gotten as high back 15-20yrs ago. This is what happened with SM 2. This was a slow paced overboard love story that went way tooo far using the comic book excuse to get away with things that couldn't even happen in the SM comics! yes i know its a comic book but for crying out loud, he would have at least broke his nose slamming into that brick wall. Thats just one dumb thing in a series of many others. An elevated train in NY Dead ending over water? LOL Too many flaws and boring story. MJ lives next store to Peter but hasn't seen him in two years? "Long time, no see" Endless shots of Peter being a loser. I'd rather watch the much better "Hero At Large" John Ritter movie SM 2= 5/10
| 5
|
I found myself irritated with one of the reviewers who gave this mini-series a terrible review because it left him feeling "disturbed". Ermm.... I think that's the intention....
As many others have pointed out, the series is superbly put together: the actors are great; the script, if anything, is minimalist and the production excellent.
This isn't reality TV. This picks out the darkest aspects of how are future in this this modern age could end up, in extremis....
Personally, I think it's a Facebook/Twitter/Flickr/Android/iPhone/Tab/internet horror story and whilst I think it's probably too brutal for most people, it is a reflection of how we give up and of ourselves to the digital, overwhelmingly public way that the world now wants us to be.
I love the show. Will it change my FB or other behavior? No but, truth be told, I might be watching out of the corner of my eye....
| 9
|
I really want to enjoy this expanded Harry Potter universe. It's extremely slow for 70% of the movie. My biggest problem with it is bad storytelling. I barely know any of the characters names or even care about their backstory. I don't know why Dumbledore has to follow muggle 1920s fashion at Hogwarts. He was so lifeless as a character he didn't stand out as revalent to the story.
The movie looked pretty but was extremely boring and lifeless -_-
| 5
|
The story is not special, but the plot is clever. The comedy is also nothing special, though still enjoyable. One thing that's weird for me is Scarlet Johansson's acting, which is not major and only at the part of acting out her husband I consider good and she got nominated for best supporting actress, that's really weird for me.
| 7
|
I would love to start writing about positives, but I won't:
I start by saying that the critics exaggerate the rating of this film, it is nothing more than a good film, it is not special and its script is cliche, just one of thousands of other horror films. (so much so that I guessed the whole story and its plot-twist in a very short time...)
I love being able to say that the entire cast blew me away with outstanding performances and that I'm as proud as it is full of hope to think that some of the names in this film will go on to have hot careers in Hollywood.
The direction has great camera games at the time of terror, but in itself, we clearly don't see anything new in it, I would even say that it is very inspired by the style of M. Night Shyamalan...
As for violence? Don't worry, few scenes of misfortunes happen on the screen... but the few, sometimes they are too much. I do not recommend to those with a weak stomach.
Even though it's not something special, I had fun with this cliché horror and it has good acting, so that's what matters! And I'm excited for news of a prequel or sequel, it seems to be an idea with the possibility of having a great universe to explore.
| 6
|
Astonishing to start with! this anime is one of my most loved I have ever seen this way, Seriously I was the fan of "Death Note". The voice was ideal for each character, and it gave every one the very life you would expect to see.
The activity is incredible, one of the more detailed I have found in anime, and the design of the characters is brilliant. Go watch this anime quickly!
| 9
|
The show had promise, a cool concept, and very interesting location/history/avatars-heroes in it. Cool concepts do not necessarily translate into Vision...that has to come from the writing/directing and of course the production side of things...lack of vision, pressure from the suits killed this cool concept.
PEOPLE!!! PLEASE dont blame the actors...each one does a great job in there own right and are quit capable...its the directing. It was lacking in vision.
And the writing was lacking in coherence and purpose...that it. But of course without Vision and Purpose what is anything?
Thats what we got...lots of words, and movements, and sounds, attempting to deliver something, but not entirely sure what that something is or should be.
At least we got to see Mark and Stephen (moon knight) develop somewhat...because for anything to be well received, we need to see the characters journey...but that journey will still fall flat without Vision and Purpose. (oh and a free(ish) hand from the suits)
| 5
|
Nagraj Manjule's 'Jhund' is a genuine piece of art that makes you aware of your sin and express your positive satisfaction.
Where exploitation is the culture, singing the song of humanity is rebellion!
| 10
|
The movie Bhaag Milkha Bhaag is not only a story of Milkha Singh but it is a motivation for all those who give up at times when there is no hope at all. There are times when we lose hope and get down on our knees but Milkha Singh did the opposite to prove that he is a kind of person who would fight out all the things to make himself a LEGEND of all times. It is a fact that he could not get his love but because of that love only he is today known by the name Flying SIKH. Grand Salute to the man who proved his words and earned the BLAZER of team India. Milkha Singh made his lifetime achievements winning 77 races out of the 80 he ran. The one which no one can forget is the Olympics race of 1960 in which he saw behind. The moment he saw behind the GOLD medal was gone. It was hard day for all the Indians but he never made the same mistake again ever.
| 10
|
I watched the first 30 minutes about 2 weeks ago, wasn't really hooked, and got distracted by a shiny object. Last Thursday I came back to it when I wasn't in tired, and watched the first episode beginning to end. The pilot episode was a slow burn but the last 10 minutes sufficiently hooked me to follow it up with the next episode. It has kept getting better. Pacing, and special effects are well tuned, and the acting is above average. I saw the original series repeatedly, and there are just enough references, and ties to the original to make it cozy and familiar, yet enough plot and character twists to make it surprising. The science may be plastered on a bit loosely, but if you watched the original the science wasn't present. It was a weekly family serial. Art direction is outstanding so far. As I pointed out at the start, the first episode is a slow burn, and didn't really grab me until the last 10 minutes, but it did grab me. Episode 2 just pulled me in deeper. This is, as the original series, a family friendly serial sci fi. I loved the first season, but I loved Firefly and that was cancelled prematurely. To be clear Firelfy and L.I.S. reboot are really two different animals, but IMHO both equally endearing and absorbing. Just one update addition to my original review: The science in the original Lost In Space was iffy at best, even at the age of 10, an episode where Dr. Smith is turned to gold was just too goofy, but that's not why I liked it. It was just fun. So is this.
-B
| 8
|
Camera leadership and sound is good. The different views of the actions drag on too much time. When the movie was over, I thought: oh my god, that was it ? The plot is totally boring, there is no highlight. You do not even see one German soldier, only the sounds of the planes, bombs, machine guns. The general historical story is very interesting and you could have made to this theme a very good movie, but this here is a shame, a total disaster and boring movie.
PS: Even FRURY is better than dunkirk. And Fury is already over the top (four men with a tank against a whole company, about 100 men!)
| 2
|
First and foremost, Dunkirk is PG-13 movie. There's almost no blood, sweat and real war horrors in it. What we're basically seeing is a sort of a documentary. Dunkirk's primary goal is making you aware of in how difficult situation British and French soldiers were.
That means that there's little dialogue in the movie. No personal story is embedded in it. But what is really strange is that there is not so much action neither. Action is distributed throughout the movie and always comes as a climax to previous developments. That's why you can hear silent but noticeable "tika-taka" sound throughout almost the entire movie.
Secondly, Dunkirk is a very tense and loud experience. Story itself never rushes but steadily grows until it bursts. I believe emphasizing that effect is the reason why Nolan decided to tell the story in a non-linear fashion from three different perspectives; that way he can constantly keep you on the edge of your seat. If that weren't so, Dunkirk would frankly be a boring movie.
All in all, if you're tired of violence, superficiality and too much talking but love tense story-line, Dunkrik is spot on. As for the war movie veterans: you may find it a bit unconvincing. It's still worth giving it a shot.
| 7
|
I watched this miniseries because it was labelled as a crime story, but it's not. It's just a very sweetened melodrama full of depressing characters, most of them irrelevant to the story. Besides, there are too many subplots, too many suspects, silly red herrings, and, in the end, the crime that triggers the story is weak and unoriginal.
I guess the success of the show rest in Kate Winslet's involvement. With another lead, this would have been an unremarkable pseudo police drama.
| 6
|
Karan Johar's episodic, scattered and unfocused My Name is Khan is a laborious and unguided effort with the best of intentions but the worst of executions; a film looking to shed light on a disability or "a form of high-functioning autism" so as to help the rest of the world understand or be aware, but just comes to resemble a languidly played television soap melodrama between people we're not entirely interested in. Johar's film doesn't necessarily earn the right to go to the places it eventually comes to venture off and away to; a film which comes to spread its wings from simplistic and down to Earth roots to a searing; sweeping; Into the Wild inspired piece meshed with Fincher's Benjamin Button film that will eventually come to believe that the marginalisation or misjudgements incurred unto that of autistic people sort-of doubles up as a racial marginalisation born out of national reaction to a globe-bearing event.
The place in which it is difficult not to begin when it comes to films such as My Name is Khan is that of Levinson's 1989 duel Golden Bear-Best Picture Oscar winning film Rain Man; a film that brilliantly utilised the 'road movie' arc to actually explore the general ignorance's, epitomised within Cruise's initially unlikeable character, that are incurred unto people of the titular Rain Man's ilk. The joy was in a realisation process born out of all of that misunderstanding and exploiting, Levinson perfectly combining the element of mental illness and the film's singular stranded framework to weave a heartfelt and emotional film about changing attitudes and shifting senses of awareness. My Name is Khan is no Rain Man, a film about a simple enough guy going about his business in America; getting married; travelling some more and capturing most of it by way of a DV camera and a notebook, to the point we have to ask whether or not the character's special needs characteristic is even necessary to proceedings.
The film begins with an unnerving procession of shots in an American airport somewhere at the back end of last decade, the titular Rizwan Khan (Rukh Khan) fiddles with the pebbles he holds and mutters to himself as airport security pat people down prior to a flight boarding; the construction of the sequence designed to alienate us from Kahn, designed to misinterpret him; to fear him. When he's pulled up for making a snap remark about the then President George W. Bush, it turns out the kid is anything but a terrorist and is just, in the eyes of homeland security, a simpleton there to be mocked. The sequence goes a long way in trying to encapsulate the misthinkings and misrepresentations that the general outlook on a man of Khan's disposition consists of; the later reveals showing us all up for being so ambivalent in the first place.
Prior to his journeying of the globe so as to try and meet Bush for reasons that later become clearer, Khan had a life at the very beginning of the decade just past; the passing of his beloved mother in native India pushing him off out to San Fransisco so as to work with his successful businessman brother Zakir. There are a lot of early Asperger's 'symptom' sequences, a montage of sorts establishing Khan's tendencies even at a very early age to succumb to what the condition demands: the sharp, effective memorising and ability to recite reams of information on menial things; the hatred of noise, large expansive events and big crowds and the ability to state precise figures and stats that he may have read – Khan's airport-based babblings on specific flight details, for instance, a typical symptom in action; an event designed to highlight blunt ramifications of the condition but really just calling to mind that of Hoffman's own Qantas related murmurings in the aforementioned Rain Man.
Once there, the meeting with a young beautician named Mandira (Kajol) gives way to all manner of wacky encounters; one fleeting moment of interest sees them stand in a coastal park and speak freely, the city's high-rises dominating Mandira's background suggesting an already prominent integration with society as well as an unsuppressed and 'free' existence amidst all the buildings and such; Khan's is quite simply Alcatraz island jail, a highlighting of how his condition close to all but literally "imprisons" him, in this sense. One thing leads to another and they are married, the garnering of a step son in Sameer (Makaar) another addition to proceedings when it is established few men other than Khan would be able to act as such an effective father; an early example of Khan using his syndrome to win a prize where all other mentors have failed with young Sameer a slow bringing of the man's condition around so as to instill degrees of likeliness or usefulness to the man.
Johar's film is too scatty in tone and content to truly get excited about, the film is rabid and kooky but then highly solemn as it brings everything back down several gears for certain instances. Somewhere along the line, the proverbial reign is let go; the horse bolts and tangents left, right and centre each open up mercilessly pushing our lead down each and every one of them. The will to explore the illness is there, the substance that comes with it most probably hiding somewhere beneath the surface; but the film is pure cheese, a television soap opera in episodes stretched out to an unnecessary length and aiming for places it doesn't really have the ability to go. The film may very well begin with the world, encapsulated through Johar's editing and camera work, shunning Khan but it will limp to its finale of the world embracing him in a melodramatic and contrived way.
| 4
|
Move over, James Bond, Daniel Craig has another series to star in.
A surprise hit when it was released in 2019, KNIVES OUT was Daniel Craig's first outing as Southern Master Detective Benoit Blanc. This All Star whodunnit, Directed by Rian Johnson (STAR WARS: THE LAST JEDI) was a resounding hit and a sequel was inevitable. The biggest mystery was the question as to whether the new mystery - and this character - would hold up to the first one.
And...that question has been answered as THE GLASS ONION is a fascinating, interesting commentary on our modern "Click Bait" society, the pandemic and the shallow people looking for attention while also disguising itself as a murder mystery.
THE GLASS ONION does what a good sequel should do - take the essence of the first movie (the characters, the tone) - and opens it up in new, unusual and daring ways. And, in this, THE GLASS ONION acquits itself nicely.
Credit, of course, goes to Writer/Director Johnson who found a new premise and direction for our intrepid Detective to go and peels back the layers of this Onion in intriguing and clever directions. The story was always one step ahead of the viewer in it's twists and turns - the sign of a well devised mystery - and Johnson knows how to thread this needle honestly (the clues were there all along, you just needed to see them). He also throws in enough red herrings to keep the audience guessing and mentally going down dead-end rabbit holes.
Craig puts back on the SeerSucker Suite of Benoit Blanc and this suit, improbably, fits him perfectly. As befits a good actor who gets a second chance to play a character, Craig fleshes out Blanc while settling back into a character that is now familiar to the audience.
As befits a good murder mystery, Johnson brings together an All-Star Cast and not only does one have to figure out "whodunnit", but in this GLASS ONION, one also needs to figure out "who's gonna get it". Edward Norton (Fight Club), Kate Hudson (ALMOST FAMOUS), David Bautista (GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY), Kathryn Hahn (BAD MOMS) and Leslie Odom, Jr. (Broadway's HAMILTON) all bring the right level of star power, mystery and intrigue to their characters and they blend together into a nice ensemble that adds to the "whodunnit" aspect of this film.
Sticking out from this ensemble - and the clique that the others have formed - is Janelle Monae (HIDDEN FIGURES) as an estranged person from the past who will help unlock the secret of THE GLASS ONION - but will it be as the solver of the mystery? A key piece of the puzzle? The victim? The murderer? Her performance brings all of that to the table and continues to get me wondering why Ms. Monae isn't a bigger Movie Star than she is. She has shone in every film that I have seen her in (including the woe-fully misguided ANTEBELLUM). It was GREAT to see her shine again.
An original murder mystery - that is more than "just" a murder mystery - THE GLASS ONION will be satisfying for those who enjoy these types of films, while also bringing something new to the genre...and cements Benoit Blanc as a character that Daniel Craig will be playing for many films to come.
Letter Grade: A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
| 8
|
Extraction comes out at a time when a lot of people could use some extra action in their lives. Sadly, Extraction only provides the absolute minimum. Sure, it has all of the requisite explosions and killing, but it lacks any sense of style. If you have seen an action movie from the last 20 years then you have essentially already watched Extraction. It is a shame that the film could not have more of an identity of its own. I was hoping Extraction would help break up the monotony of quarantine life, but instead it fit right in.
| 6
|
It's a pretty good tv show. A surprise in a good way. I wish the writing was better at times, and the characters can be annoying, but overall a solid 7/10.
I'm not impressed with season 3. Too much trying to make the audience feel uncomfortable with each passing episode, rather than improving the story or characters. If it wasn't for episode 4, I'd rate this season 4/10 or lower.
| 7
|
I really liked this movie. One fun thing is that the movie was`nt bloody on a scary way, more as a funny one!! I don`t really know what catogory it should be under but Thriller/Comedy fits pretty good i think!
| 7
|
I watched it for the first time and thought it was an excellent factual reenactment with no flaws. Upon reaserch I was disappointed by it. The majority of errors were accidental but the idea to replace three male scientists with a female one was fueled by industrial greed.
| 8
|
Glass Onion (A Knives Out Mystery) wasn't the perfect murder mystery, I don't know why I was expecting that genre, especially as it wasn't listed as being in that genre. However, I was entertained and for that reason I rated it as I did.
A well cast movie. I wasn't sure about the character Derol (Noah Segan) and what he offered to the movie (although he played Trooper Wagner in Knives Out (2019)). No other reference popped into my head and the part is small so wasn't worth thinking about anyway. (Update) Well, I went and read the Trivia section and did find the reason that he's in the movie, an association with Rian Johnson.
It's neither mind blowing or lackluster, it is simply entertaining. I would recommend this.
| 8
|
Sequels are rarely good. Even more scarce is a great sequel. This is one of those special sequels that equals, if not surpasses, the original work. The acting is, of course, superb and Robert De Niro is brilliant in his supporting role as the young Vito. What is perhaps the most remarkable aspect of this great movie is that it is almost entirely fresh. In other words, it was not tied directly to a book like the original and afforded the script writers room to be even more creative. A masterpiece.
| 8
|
Together with: Chinatown Young Frankenstein The Conversation Murder on the Orient Express and The Three Musketeers + The Four Musketeers
The Godfather: Part II remains effectively the best movie of '74.
But there were also several foreign movies of quality such as Le fantôme de la liberté Lacombe Lucien Gruppo di famiglia in un interno Nada Fatti di gente perbene and A Estrela Sobe.
And there were also very fine TV productions such as The Missiles of October Antony and Cleopatra Monty Python's Flying Circus (the final episodes) BBC Play of the Month: The Deep Blue Sea BBC Play of the Month: The Changeling Judge Dee and the Monastery Murders.
| 9
|
Steven Spielberg was probably destined to do such a movie, as Virtual Reality becomes more and more a synonym for a change in society, which of course it is not. However, there are already movies out there covering this topic. Fantastic movies like the Matrix. Spielberg never comes closes to the quality and intensity especially the Matrix offers. Spielberg picked the main actors of Ready Player One by his well-known scheme, young to very young, teens and twens. Maybe because he does associate the online community with those ages. In fact, through the whole movie, there is a remarkable presence of immature fantasy, the whole world of online games and virtual reality has been visually and conceptually buffed up causing an unrealistic impression. A weird, frenetic story accompanied by those nerd type youngsters, having every answer to every machine-human interaction, in seconds, while everything else tumbles upside down, story elements that do not fit together or make no sense, and in between those reminders of that humanity is at loss, and we all have to cope and destroy whatever cliché evil together. All in all that was the taste I had, when watching this movie, immature, overdone fantasy garbage for teens, who use mobile devices to an excess, but have no clue about its technical realization and no ambition whatsoever as long as the can use it. 04/10
| 4
|
Alright, I see many reviews are biased from Marvel fan boys and say BvS was sht compared to this one. So I will try to give an honest review and try to avoid all this DC vs Marvel fight.
First off THE PLOT. At least from my perspective, the first half was a bit rushed, new characters didn't get proper introduction. The movie seemed during this first part like it was trying to be serious but wasn't sure, then switched back to the old marvel style of jokes and hollow dialogs. I hoped that Captain America will truly fight for justice, which I turned out to be wrong. Don't want to spoil anything about his development throughout the movie. Then after hour and half of boredom, sparked with few jokes and mediocre/good fighting scenes (yes even the one with black panther, for reasons I will write later) came the reason why people call this movie awesome. Fighting scene on the airport. As far as the "choreography" and fights go, it was a well made part of the movie. Superheroes coordinated well with each other. The final battle was in my opinion the best part of the movie, (seen in trailers) especially when Bucky and Cap go both at Iron Man.
I personally didn't like in the story, new characters were introduced very fast and some of them even immediately revealed their identity (I guess new rule for Marvel superheroes).
THE CHARACTERS: we all know the good old marvel superheroes from previous movies, so I'm not going to talk about them. I will focus on two new guys Spidey and Black Panther. While Black Panther's development and introduction was good, new mysterious guy appears and is very angry, it was ruined a little bit with immediate reveal of his secret identity. Although I must say this was made up with excellent fighting with very few flaws. And Spidey? It feels like Marvel got rights back for Spiderman from Sony in the middle of the movie shooting, and they didn't fully think it through how to properly implement and introduce him into the movie. It went more or less (spoiler? wanna join? yeah why not). Other than that he was the funniest character and was in the lead of bringing the fun back from the first boring half. Sadly as far as his character goes, that's it. It felt like the only lines he had were jokes.
THE CINEMATOGRAPHY. Here is where I have to give Marvel a big minus. First off the fights. Often you could see characters 4-5 meters away from their enemies, and in next shot right next to them beating their asses and yes I am mainly looking at you Black Widow. Some of the scenes mainly from first half felt inconsistent. Second one and which bugged me during the entire movie. CGI. I expected much more, and to be honest it looked like work of 2nd grade college students or visibly fake internet videos. Some scene's CGI was so cringe worthy, they looked like they weren't made in Hollywood but Bollywood. And it seems like Spidey got what Deadpool was afraid of. "Don't make my costume green, or animated." And last but not least the physics. You know you have terrible physics in your movie, when even the movie itself has to make fun of it. The objects and people were flying around like in "goat simulator". There isn't excuse like they are super heroes. It was sloppy. Nothing had it's weight, and it was very visible during the fights (for example the panther fight as mentioned above). And one note to the producer. If someone is mortal and will fall from height bigger than 15 m, they will die or at least end up in coma with almost every broken bone. Again some scenes felt because of it almost Bollywood like.
OVERALL This movie did break the mediocre line of Marvel movies, yet still wasn't awesome. Marvel has yet to surprise me with a very good movie. Other than 2 good fighting scenes and few jokes I didn't take anything else from this movie. Maybe bad memories horrible cgi.
LAST WORDS: As you can (maybe) see from my review I like a little deeper movies. Marvel movies from my perspective are mediocre, and keep their standard of an easy "popcorn movie". Good to watch once, but not many times after. I tried to stay objective and point out the very good or very bad things about the movie. I myself was and still am a big fan of Marvel comics, but don't like Robert Downey Jr's portrayal of Iron Man, yet in this movie, he improved my opinion of his role as he wasn't a complete douche. And people should really stop comparing Marvel and DC movies. They are clearly made for different demographic and are taken in two different ways. The only thing they have in common are people/aliens with super powers.
This movie deserves max 7.5/10, definitely not more than 8 if you compare it with other similarly rated great movies.
| 7
|
How did they manage to stuff so many cliches and forced plot twists into just 7 episodes? If there was an award for that, this would be a shoe-in. Ms Winslet is fine, as always, but I don't feel she had much to do here; or maybe she did, but it couldn't compensate for the Screenwriting 1010 script. Very disappointed.
| 4
|
Interesting story plot with smart characters . Amazing background score . Keep you at the edge of the seat till last episode
| 9
|
Not often I review but this time I felt I had to so that Netflix hopefully cancels this what-feels-like-über-budget-but-strangely-isn't-budget show.
The CGI feels CGI, the acting is "wooden" and basic, the dialogue is written by a fifteen year old scribbling down their dreams half awake. It feels like a game more than a fantasy show. See GOT, Britannica, Last Kingdom instead. Or Dark Crystal if you want childish fantasy. But not this.
If it wouldn't have been that it was from Netflix and Henry cavill being in it, I would have honestly thought this was a Asylum production.
| 5
|
One of finest film of hindi cinema.... music , dialogs, story , acting every sec of this film is eye catching ..Srk and Manisha is superb ...
| 9
|
It was a 9 star rating for me with Season 1, but after watching season 2 it went down to a 6 for me. It seemed like I wasn't watching What if? Season 2, it felt like I was watching the Peggy Carter show... like what if Peggy Carter did this, then this, and this, this too, also this... it was nice and all but like there are thousands of other characters with a multitude of possibilities and you choose the same Captain Carter do several things in a row... it wasn't "what if", it was more like "and this". Aside from that, the stories weren't too bad, but it had advertised as a what if show, and it wasn't for more than half the season.
| 6
|
This movie is around 3 hours long-and it felt like 3 days. And yes it is quite good, but an epic in pretentiousness and political correctness, which assures it of a clutch of awards.
The earth is dying, so NASA needs to use a worm hole to find an alternative planet. The hero's are a father and his daughter. In brief the story asks the question will the search for another habitable world be successful or not?
The film explores amongst other things that popular sci fi idea of time travel. Unfortunately much of the picture is full of junk science and techno babble. Throw in some strong ideas about "love" and family and a famous poem, and that is about it.
Good points: special effects, production design, a number of good one liners.
Bad points: Far too long, an unnecessary complicated and convoluted story line plus having Michael Caine in the film. He very nearly ruins it as he speaks like a cockney selling fruit in a street market rather than a respected scientist that he is meant to portray.
Because of the bad points I need to significantly reduce my vote and hence I give this:
6/10.
| 6
|
This series starts dark and unpleasant as it moves at its glacial pace to wherever it's heading. Apparently that is, eventually, a supernatural story, but this series apparently doesn't think that's ever worth foreshadowing. This suggests that they think you'll be drawn in by the mood, characters, and mystery, and at the end of the first episode I had little interest in any of them.
| 5
|
I watched 6 Underground on Netflix.
I've seen some mixed reviews about it on various sites.
Most saying it's just flashy action with little to back it up.
NEWS FLASH
You don't watch a movie like that expecting deep plots, excellent dialog, or great acting.
It is what it is.
Personally I liked it better not being treated like a child and over explained every little detail.
To me it looked like a pilot to a series of movies or mini series.
I wouldn't give it a 10 but I wouldn't give it a 5 either.
Overall it was a good waste of 2hrs and micheal bay didn't fail to entertain
| 6
|
Moon Knight it's the newest addition to the MCU, andit was a clever move.
The actors and the shoots are amazing, but I do feel the need to say that I had a hard problem engaging to the story since it was confusing at all. For me, this actually didn't felt like a Marvel project. I didn't felt the connection to the MCU, and I struggle so hard on keeping track with the episodes coming out each week. The character as it is, I think that it is a great one, but I don't find a way for it to connect to the former MCU superhero's.
Overall loved the visuals, the acting and the music choices for the opening.
MOON KNIGHT - 8/10.
| 7
|
A fantasy of fools, what is done only in movies but not in real scenario. Trying to convice only movie addict nation to live in dreamworld. Just to decieve the poor citizens of India
| 1
|
I like Marvel movies, I really do. But this show was pretty terrible. The story's needlessly convoluted, the dialogue's juvenile and preachy, the characters are two dimensional and inconsistent, the action is badly shot and uninteresting, and the few good ideas the show have are terribly underdeveloped. And most importantly... Its incredibly boring. Predictable, slowly paced, with uninteresting sets and cinematography. I have no idea where the shows' high ratings are coming from, seems like people decided to like it even before it came out and are unvilling to admit how they really feel about it, as its low quality is impossible to miss.
| 4
|
Stop remaking your old content for cash. Make something new. I have yet to see a live action remake that is memorable. They've all been mediocre at best and this one is subpar.
| 2
|
Too much CGI, makes effects looks far too fake, plot average at best, only reason to see film is because it featured in Avengers. Watched for free and 14 year daughter fell asleep watching it. Better films out there.
| 4
|
Great idea and timely in the subject. It could have been a great movie if it were not for the soundbite presentation.
The acting is good, but the film structure has a lot to answer for. They put in the standard character conflicts to punch up the story.
It is the Iranian revolution. In the chaos, six U. S. Embassy people escape to the Canadian embassy. Now the problem is how to extricate them before they are detected and dispatched. "To this day, this story stands as an enduring model for international cooperation between governments."
So, an ersatz movie company for a film called "Argo" is formed. We listen to lots of talk and a few dispatches. Yet the story progresses ever so slowly.
As Tom Stoppard, author of "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead" writes "In a tragedy, even minor characters die."
| 3
|
I don't how do people rate movies this is clearly one of the worst movie I saw
| 4
|
This is an original screen play that is not adapted from a book.
Clementine Kruczynski (Kate Winslet) is disenchanted with her latest beau and has a procedure to erase her memory of him. Her now-ex Joel Barish (Jim Carrey...that gets to make Carry faces) finds out and decides to reciprocate. Things do not go as well as planned as the processing team is full of high jinks.
The concept is probably good however the actors are mismatched, and the timing is off. You are ready for it to get better or quit. My bet is that you are best off quitting.
I would like to tell you more, but I am afraid I had this movie erased from my mind and hope with the low rating that I do not try and see it again.
However, I guess "Everybody's got to Learn Sometime" written by James Warren.
| 4
|
Based on all the positive reviews, I expected this movie to on a par with such classics as West Side Story, Seven Brides for Seven Brothers, and the like. Unfortunately, its only apparent attraction is its nostalgia for past musicals. I understand that professional critics love movies about struggling artists. I also understand why they like scenes that recall scenes from classic movies. The music and choreography were pleasant enough, but I saw nothing especially unique or compelling. I cannot see this movie being considered a classic, like the films it displays nostalgia for.
| 5
|
Michel Gondry brings Jim Carrey and Kate Winslet together for a dark, eccentric and powerful film that no one should miss. Their rewarding performance along with the crafted screenplay and twists and turns make this film worth seeing more than once. Most films are so shallow they only last their glimmer for one view. However, Eternal Sunshine is a jewel. The more you see it, the more you get out of it. The entire film is a portrayal of the journey of the mind, life, and the center of its being. A truly inspiring film, and one that should be adored and loved as a centerpiece of this journey. It teaches more than it pleases. While Jim Carrey is a comedy man, he is incredibly apt to take this role. A must-see. 10/10.
| 7
|
I know the character Oscar plays has multiple personalities, obviously spent time on dialect of Steven, just the accent is awful. In this time when actors spend time crafting accents and dialects, apart from that interesting to see if the story telling will get better needed tobe a longer first episode to held with the disassociated personas and story.
| 6
|
I was slightly interested in seeing this film but was apprehensive about seeing it in the cinemas because it looked like such a depressing movie.
I did end up seeing it in the cinemas but I'm glad to say that's it not a depressing as I thought it was going to be.
Don't get me wrong; there are pretty much no happy moments in this film. Something happens pretty early in the beginning, it's pretty much just a sad fest for the rest of the film.
Having said that, it still is a good film. The fight scenes look authentic and real, it's brilliantly acted by some of movies biggest hitters and gets better when Forest Whitaker appears.
While it is predictable, it was still an entertaining watch.
CHAPPY THINKS you should strap on your boxing gloves, boys and girls, because this is going to be one hard-hitting film! (See what I did there!)
| 6
|
Why is this film a 12a? Even one reviewer said his 8 year old loved it!! This film should have been rated a U or PG as it's nothing more than a child's family film... Very disappointing
| 3
|
Science Fiction or pshihological thriller?an excuse to spend some money making this tv series.first 2 episodes,very promising,from the third episod you already enter in a soap drama with pshihological manipulative moments.at episode 7 my patient suddenly died...i can't stand to watch further more.maybe someday...thank you for reading.
| 1
|
This episode with barely any action taking place makes a compelling argument as one of the best episodes this series has ever had. All the lore and stunning art depicting ancient times as well as the callback to the very first episode, the way they were all tied so neatly is mind-blowing. Isayama is a genius on an otherworldly level! Grisha Yeager's tragic backstory and the way it was adapted -- the direction, music, VA & especially the writing -- #AOT is truly a masterpiece, the #GOAT!!
| 10
|
Was expecting a lot from this movie but actually ended up getting just a bit. Not scary, didn't even tense up during it, it's just kinda dumb? Lol.
I don't know what the monsters look like but I bet they look goofy af.
| 4
|
Awful acting for the majority, with often exaggerated expressions and the odd accent were just a mess. Extremely weak characters, especially considering the movie starts off by mentioning it is based on a true story and real people were affected.
Movies based on true stories are a lot more difficult to pull off unless it has a good story to tell. This was neither a good nor true story - despite the claims in opening credits, to which completely changes the leeway for the movie...
Claiming to be a true story makes some aspects of the story forgivable, knowing afterwards that the whole ordeal was a publicity stunt is distasteful, to say the least.
| 1
|
Totally boring movie.. lots of expectation from this movie but its was not a good movie
| 5
|
The moon is beautiful and knights can be cool. But the Moon Knight has nothing of each. It is a confusing and boring show for which I needed two months to get through.
There are Egyptian Gods who somehow need avatars to act on Earth. Some of them want to punish the evil but there are philosophical dilemmas here. Ammit wants to eliminate those who will do evil in the future which results in the killing of a lot of people.
Our main guy wants to prevent this but he has problems with himself, getting blackouts and changing his character through and through. Somehow, he can also manifest abilities which is when he becomes the so-called Moon Knight. It'll turn out that these will apparently all be related to some mental illness with childhood issues but the entire revelation just seems contrived and unappealing.
The fighting is absolutely boring and it is not really clear what abilities the heroes even have. The villains are boring as well and Ammit has done basically nothing even though she was so feared upon.
Oh, and there is a talking female hippopotamus.
Yeah, nothing of the story ever remotely peaked my interest and I was a little confused by the attempted revelations in the last two episodes. The finale was very weak, there was a lot of build-up, but it was building up towards nothing. Bummer.
| 3
|
Very American, easily-aniticaped-plot movie which has quite a few plot holes which makes it very annoying to watch.
I am a long fan and am highly disappointed from this low-budget film which depicts the XMEN future world like it was still 2012 a world without hardly any mutant in it, and hardly any brains to those ones which are left.
It seemed like Marvel had simply try and see how much bucks they can squeeze from a film with absolute minimum investment in it.
meh.
| 5
|
I don't get a lot of the low reviews. It's a sci-fi show so of course some things are hokey. The visual effects are great. The story/writing is good. And I think any of the subpar acting/scenes are just due to new actors, new show, etc. I fully expect these to decrease as time goes on. Overall I've really enjoyed the first season and hope to see more.
| 8
|
Like some other users, I rarely write IMDB reviews. But I just couldn't stand by while a bunch of what I have to believe are fake reviews put a halo on this turd of a show. As of yesterday it had a 9.3 average rating. WT? I doubt there's a single TV series in the entire IMBD library that has a ranking that high.
I know the TV series is based off a series of short stories and book. But there are, of course, the video games based off those stories. (I played one.) This feels like a TV series based off a video game. And that's pretty much always a disaster. (Same with books based off video games.)
Was excited to watch the first episode. Two minutes in I started thinking "Uh, oh. This is not going well..." I wanted to be fair, so I sucked it up for FOUR episodes before giving up.
So many things make this a stinker: -Boring story line with non-contextualized political meanderings. -Sub-par CGI and other special effects. The first monsters especially was a joke. And don't get me started on "Goat Boy." -Bizarre music. Including songs by Jasker the Bard. -Jarring anachronisms.
This show is, unfortunately, on par with many other cheesy fantasy series (The Seeker, The Shannara Chronicles, etc.) that seem target towards teens.
In a vacuum, I'd maybe give it 5 stars. But I just couldn't stand for the initial wave of 10 star glowing reviews that seemed to show up seconds after airing. Get real folks. 10 stars should be reserved for the creme of the crop. Not a show based on a book you liked...or based on a show you got paid to review.
Was even thinking about reading the books as I learned this was coming. Sad to say, this may have turned me off to that.
And don't even try to compare this to Game of Thrones. That's an insult to GoT, even with that shows deep flaws in the final seasons.
| 4
|
As a fellow film maker I can appreciate the effort that went into this. The camera work and editing is fantastic so well done to the production team.
However the story was silly, the main character Hannah was self obsessed and in my opinion evil for what she did to Clay. I really can't believe I sat through this TV show.
NOT IMPRESSED
| 4
|
I suggest you to watch it. I loved it. But only problem is this film is too old and doesn't have a nice quality. but I love it. Nice. Nice. Nice
| 9
|
There is a room in hell where people are hung from the walls, skinned, rolled in salt, doused in alcoholic hand sanitiser, and made to relive the same day over and over again.
When you first enter the gates of the underworld and meet the Devil, he offers you the following:
1 - stay chained up in the burning torture room for eternity.
2 - sit in the the projection room, where the only film you can watch is Venom 2.
When presented with these two options, I can say with some certainty that everybody in the torture room is there by choice.
| 1
|
I have watched harry potter , lord of the rings , hobbits and many sci fi and films about witches and mgic , this one is amazing . just watch it and you will love it
| 10
|
After all the hype people have given this movie and the fact it won Best Picture confuses me.
Most of it was just people sitting around talking. There were some good actiony scenes but they are few and far between, aside from Sonny's sister flipping her lid and smashing up the house, followed by the famous tollbooth scene a few minutes later.
Speaking of the house-smashing scene, it's meant to be dramatic but I burst out laughing, but that's just my morbid sense of humor.
Maybe I'm just not "getting it" and my head is up where the sun doesn't shine, but this movie was just...... kinda boring for me.
| 3
|
Start off with excellent writing, then take Sam Raimi's experience as a top notch director who knew how to make a story blend with the effects and actors. Another great film score by Danny Elfman. Whoever thought of Alfred Molina as Doctor Octopus was right on target. ( And people thought Arnold could pull his weight as Mr. freeze in Batman?????) I never thought they could pull off getting Spiderman 2 to be near as compelling as the first.They took this movie and added many laughs, without getting cheesy, and kept the action coming in between the love triangle of Peter Parker and Mary Jane. This movie works because it doesn't play off the fact that Spiderman has been a popular comic for almost 40 years. Sam Raimi( Evil Dead trilogy, The Gift and Darkman) all had little elements that he tweaked in his own way, to give Spiderman 2 something from each of these movies that shows his maturity, and brilliance as a film-maker. Throw in excellent performances from Toby Maguire, Kirsten Dunst, and the rest of the cast, and this is easily the best film of the summer to date. I doubt there will be another that even comes close.
| 10
|
The biggest letdown about this movie was knowing the story beforehand. And you could basically figure out that someone was dying for sure to get that perfect Bollywood wrapper. I looked up onto Wiki and there are some disagreements on the actual strikes themselves confirmed by BBC/independent investigators. Its impossible not to lose a soldier when engaging the enemy in a strike like that(as portrayed in the movie). So, not a full on full marks from my end because personally, it feels like another SWAT movie for me. Ofcourse, if patriotism blinds you, you can very well give the full points to this movie.
| 7
|
I love math, and I love intelligent films about intelligent people, who do intelligent things. But I don't like watching someone suffer on film. The reason I didn't give this film a higher rating was the excessive amount of time and excessive number of scenes depicting John Nash's obvious disabilities. OK , we get it; the guy is sick and suffers schizoid and paranoid delusions. So did my mother, but I tended to overlook her problems because of her wonderful outstanding qualities. They should have done the same in this film.
Russell Crowe is exceptional for the second year in a row (He did Gladiator the year before). Ed Harris is always right on the money, and Jennifer Connelly does a wonderful job as his the steadfast wife of Nash.
The scenes depicting Nash's talents and accomplishments were far more inspirational than the cheesy attempts to include us in his delusions. We know he is delusional after the first few scenes with the bogeyman from the CIA or NSA. I understand these scenes are necessary to show his pain and difficulty with these afflictions, but there is no need to hammer it with extra scenes that prevent us from discovering all of the wonderful game theories and how they were discovered by Nash. Still a very impressive film, however.
| 7
|
I dozed off a few times during this film. It was incredibly formulaic and had nothing interesting to offer. Blah!
It was pretty and all, but the story was very uninteresting.
This is obviously a case of Hollywood trying to capitalize on the Marvel Comics franchise with no intention of actually making a movie worth seeing.
I felt that I wasted my time and money on this film. I guess I didn't expect anything different, but it was still disappointing to be proved correct.
Do not bother with this film.
| 3
|
After most crime shows, watching an Agatha Christie adaptation, a Miss Marple or a Hercule Poirot, is like zipping along a 3-lane expressway, then heading down an off-ramp and joining bumper-to-bumper traffic.
Rian Johnson's "Knives Out" is a take on those sedate works, especially the movie length Hercule Poirot's (the Suchet's can actually lower your metabolism to about that of the Canadian Wood Frog in winter). You definitely need to be in the mood for them. "Knives Out" captures the style, but actually adds more energy than the classic Agatha adaptation. Looks like we are getting a series as well, another has already been made and a third planned.
Actors seem drawn to accents like they are drawn to Richard III with his hump and limp. Albert Finney was almost unintelligible in "Murder on the Orient Express", fortunately Peter Ustinov stepped in and gave us a couple of nuanced interpretations, "Death on the Nile" and "Murder under the Sun" before he and we tired of it. David Suchet gave us something between Finney and Ustinov but doubled down on the walk. Kenneth Branagh revived Poirot, but doubled down on the moustache. Rian Johnson has given us a modern setting and a new detective, Benoit Blanc, an American, played by an Englishman. However Daniel Craig growls out a Southern accent almost as impenetrable as Finney's Belgian one.
Somewhere I read that Rian Johnson briefly considered having Daniel Craig play Benoit Blanc with a different accent in each film without explanation. Maybe the next one would have hommaged Fu Manchu.
Set in a musty old mansion, like many an Agatha Christie, there is the risk of an oversupply of quirky characters. Mind you, Christopher Plummer steals the show as old man Thrombey, but he always did. However it's dangerous to cram in too many eccentrics especially when your main guy is so mannered; otherwise it becomes parody like "Murder By Death".
We even get a bit of social messaging that wouldn't be out of place at the Academy Awards. However by the middle, the elements fall into place, there is humour, we are involved and the whole thing comes together.
"Knives Out" is long, but repays our endurance. Going forward, getting away from the stately homes to an exotic location always benefitted Poirot, it should do the same for Blanc.
| 7
|
A very enjoyable movie, yet it never meets the very high standard we have come to expect from watching the trailer. For me it never captivated my imagination, based on this movie I'm not convinced that an ant can be a superhero. Overall this is a very good film when you consider acting, direction, effects and everything else. It's the plot that lags behind. Don't get me wrong, the storyline has only minor plot holes, it just isn't actually very interesting. If you want a movie about the beginning of a new superhero, and how they came to be you should watch Batman Begins. If you want a very impressive superhero with plenty of flair, watch Iron Man... What I'm trying to say is that this movie has already been done only better than Ant-Man.
Ant-Man simply does not live up to the standards, that we could have hoped for and were promised.
| 4
|
Given the casting & media hype for this tv series, you would be expecting that an interesting story would be afoot. Well, you would be mistaken in that expectation. As adult viewers, we have so many more choices today than in the era of just 3 big networks to pick from. The winners in this game have a minimum requirement to get the audience interested in their product right from the start. No one will sit through multiple episodes of dreck waiting for the plot to become clear. Tried to get into whatever story line the producers put together here, but it just doesn't work. Kidman was wooden and less than convincing in her depiction and the children seemed more like NPCs than actual characters. Give this series a hard pass. There's plenty of better material out there.
| 1
|
I can't think of any TV show that I love more then this one. I've watched this whole show at least 3 times already (Maybe even more as a kid) It's animation at it's best.
| 10
|
Despite being a huge fan of James Franco, when the trailers started for this film, the seventh instalment of the "Planet of the Apes" franchise, all I could think was "Really?" I was sure it was a guaranteed flop. Then the film got released and not only was it one of the biggest blockbusters of the year, there were numerous critics who PRAISED this film.
And I cannot begin to figure out why.
I had absolutely no interest in this film at all, especially with the 2001 remake having been such a joke, but found myself curious enough to watch it on a long flight between California and Hawaii. Seeing it was free, and I had nothing but time to waste, I thought sitting through it would at least give me the right to an opinion rather than blindly passing judgement. But my assumption of the film was right. It is absolute crap.
Franco plays a scientist developing a serum to combat Alzheimer's and decides to try testing on chimps. Long story short, the serum is so effective, the chimps figure out how to break out of the lab and take over the Golden Gate Bridge. Yeah, all those action scenes you saw in the trailer? Every single one is from the last fifteen to twenty minutes of the film.
And although the special effects are impressive enough, that, in no way, makes up for the rest of this ridiculously cheesy and horrible film.
Even monkeys would be smart enough to avoid this one. So maybe that does prove that chimps are actually smarter than the movie-going masses. Watching a film about a man trying to cure Alzheimer's actually managed to make me feel like a moron for having thought this film might actually have some merit.
| 2
|
Maybe this passes for an 8.0 rating from people of that region of the world...maybe it has a lot to do with nationalism. but, overall, it would seem that this doesn't belong in the global market. unless you've never seen war films made from MANy other countries...not a complicated relationship in the movie. and the ace up the sleeve ending was just sooooooooo predictable...i watched it all the way through just to see why it might have such a high rating...i guess a large number of people just don't know any better...
| 5
|
They were not kidding when they said this was a Captain America movie. Aside from the occasional pompous Tony Stark stealing the spotlight, every actor in this film had minimal screen time. Those that had descent amount of time in front of the camera where quite forgettable. This is one of the biggest downfalls of the franchise thus far. It might just be too much of a challenge to keep track of that many story lines and characters and there is also no denying how shallow the actual script in this film is. Not to mention the franchise has failed to really bring a memorable villain to this universe. The villain here, without going into too much details and spoilers, is some self righteous victim of the Avengers deadly carelessness out for revenge...really?
As far as the actual story line it is as predictable as any other Marvel films in the past. I would find it surprising if anybody who watched the film saw something they weren't already anticipating. The "plot twists" were more like plot reroutes and were nothing unexpected. I was also yearning for a lot more depth in the dialouge and interactions between the characters, yet I was sorely disappointed when they chose to go with the long tedious action sequences instead. You would assume that the highlights of the film were the already mentioned confrontations between these super heroes yet, they leave a lot to be desired. At a certain point it almost becomes pointless to see these heroes relentlessly pounding on each other without any real consequences. We get they're nearly immortal with all of their abilities but at some point during the film you will feel guilty for demanding some actual blood to be shed. I almost feel that the main audience of the film were children and non comic book fans. Not that this is bad in any way but their material was not as transcendent as Guardians of the Galaxy, for example.
My biggest problem with the film was with the one dimensional characters scattered throughout the two hours. None of whom really grasped my attention. We all knew what each characters motives were which pretty much took out all of the intrigue. We live in a time where we demand "gray characters", in a manner of speaking. We want flawed characters that seem more human....characters that we can truly relate too. A warning for you movie "critics", do no expect that from this film.
Having said all that the film was descent and was watchable. There are moments when the film went with very realistic and mature themes such as, weather who should regulate the activities of such powerful beings....which was something to really ponder. There were also elements of the film that were intriguing such as the mass casualties of the Avengers excursions. Ultimately, however, the film fails to really make us believe there is an actual war going on between the Avengers. In the end it will seem like a minor disagreement which they will all scrapbook about and laugh of over a plate of shwarma. Perhaps I just had really high expectations which lead to my unpleasant disappointment. Or perhaps the standard for comic book films is lower than any other type of film. Whatever the case may be, the film is worth the viewing even with all of it's flaws.
| 5
|
This may be a good story.. the rise and rise of a character-from a sportsman to a soldier to a millionaire- who has an IQ lesser than that needed to get admitted in a state school- where he gets bullied and meets his love of life. This character graph has inspired many Bollywood filmmakers (Rajkumar Hirani, Karan Johar in particular) to sketch their characters, and they have milked their stories with enough drama too. I turned upon this film after watching its Bollywood inspirations. But I wasn't looking for any (melo)drama; but subtlety, of course, which, in my opinion, this film lacked. Lacking subtlety is not a problem but hammering with details being blurted out in voice over is, for me. The overdose of voice-over narration concerns me here... it gives too much of unnecessary information which aren't contributing anything to the narrative or the plot or either emotional value, and many of the details are just repeated twice for no particular reason. And this voice-over is not even breaking the fourth wall but is a narration to strangers. He meets these strangers at a bus-stop and they happen to change from time to time, just like the visitors at the home his mom had let for. (Such symbolism, if you call it one, work.) He starts his story quoting his 'mama' (and to count how many times this Mama's boy calls her out could be one irritating game for viewers). This grown up man taking us into the flashback of his childhood never came across to me as a sympathetic one though the film's 'feather light' treatment (also embodied as a symbolism in the film) worked in many tight scenes but at the same time looked desperate in demanding emotion and sympathy from the audience. (Even that white feather hitting the screen with a whoosh at the end came across as- "Oh look, we hit you so hard with such a heartwarming and light story"). Maybe I'm too cynical but the character, Forrest Gump, looked to me as a dumb throughout. And over-usage of the quote "An idiot is as idiot does" made him look more. And I totally get that the point of the film was to look the cynical world from the prism of an unintelligent man that would make it look more simpler and a winning place, but all I'm saying that this could have been said differently, more beautifully and overwhelmingly and obviously, with some subtlety.
Also I'm not asking to take away its classic status. The way the film depicts and incorporates American history, its thriving new culture and counterculture into its storytelling deserves to be acknowledged and that would have surely helped to achieve this status.
The music score is indeed beautiful. But only if the director had realized that it's also about the 'sight' and not only 'sound', he would have deployed a more focused and centered cinematographer to work who would add his bit to the narrative.
What worries me is that how did a film so repetitive and monotonous in its narration and tone with no powerful visual storytelling win Best Screenplay and Editing awards at the Oscars! But again what overwhelms me is the fact that this film which used visual effects as a requirement and not a motif to tell a story won the Oscar for Best Visual Effects!
| 6
|
The story: When you start watching the show you can tell they're trying to make you think of Bryce as the coolest guy ever(ignoring the intro cause its just supposed to show that it is a monkey being badass :0), throwing the beer bottle like he's Deadshot, then he starts talking and I just wanna stop watching at that point on but I was wanna see if it still holds value(it doesn't)
Spoilers: The whole assassination part is the worst part of the first episode, we're supposed to care about whoever getting killed in the first 10 minutes of the episode, and the policeman Hiroshimi dying too, even tho we only saw them for like a single dialouge where he gets witty with his partner/bff, and the ending, that's just dumb
Animation: The noticeable thing when you start watching the show is the sudden lag, and it shows from the intro to the end
it's bad don't watch.
| 1
|
First, I would like to say that I just read 10 plus 1 or 2 star rated reviews on here and I am convinced that they did not see anything but trailers and are paid haters to bring movie down. Aside from that there are people who didn't like it, because they want more action like Atomic Blonde or Bond type spy movies, but this is more like Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, but sexier. In short, this did not meet my criteria for going to the theater, which are explosion, lots of action, lots of stunts and in general promises a meaningless fun good time. To quote Kings Men, "This is not that type of movie." I saw it because, I have loved Jennifer Lawrence since Winter's Bone and my sister said it was "AMAZING!" Yes, you have to engage yourself and think for yourself and try to figure what is going on. You might be able to figure it out, I didn't. Nice little twists. By the way, it is brutal, but I remember only one rape, which was stopped quickly. I say that, because one reviewer said that it was about rape and raped and raped again. Obviously never saw the movie. There was an attempt that never came close to following through. The character was less about sex and more about the power of manipulation, which is a true movie spy thing. That statement in itself is probably the only real possible area of drawback in film and that you need to suspend belief on. Jennifer's character is in general playing a power game of cat & mouse and always seems to be in control, even when she is extremely vulnerable. I enjoyed it immensely. Stellar acting all the way around. Well written and good story line. I highly recommend it if you like movies that focus minimally on action, explosions/cgi and more on letting the story and characters breathe and build to an end.
| 9
|
I usually love anything that Johnny Depp is in, but this film is an exception, mainly because they picked the worst actress in the world to play the leading lady. Keira Knightly is given so much credit about being the finest female actor in Britian, I think however that her acting in this film somewhat contradicts this statement. She is truly terrible, the only bit i thought she was good was when she fell off the castle wall. But otherwise this film is quite good, i thought Johnny Depp was brilliant playing Jack Sparrow and also looked gorgeous in the process, which isn't very hard for Johnny Depp. Unfortuanatly i could only bear to watch this film once because of keiras unemotional presence and Orlando Bloom being overcast by Johnny's shadow.
| 2
|
If Annabelle is able to see this movie through some supernatural way. She would be quite devastated at the fact that there is not horror in this film. The Warren's Museum is one of the most haunted if not the most haunted place in the world, perhaps the galaxy or universe. And they get show these cheesy jump scares that feel a lot like the cheesy IT chapter 1 and 2 movies. Actually did a little research here on IMDB and found out the director for this film actually did write this movie and IT, & the Nun all of which are not scary in the slightest. Oh yeah and he's also never made a movie before. Nice. I'm an aspiring filmmaker and I can say I would have made a solid film. Would have recorded this in 70mm and created a strong atmosphere and set a strong horror tone. Dark and amazing cinematography. All of which the movie lacks big time.
| 5
|
"Talk to Me" is a debut from the Phillipou brothers under A24 that takes the oft-visited possession horror subgenre into some new territory whilst setting and consistently maintaining an eerie and disturbing tone. The depiction of modern Australian teenage culture felt a bit too "down with the kids" and drawn out at times, but generally came across well with its application of slang and contemporary cultural references that very much brought the setting into the present day. There is a blend of psychological horror, jump scares, shock horror, and gore. Meaning most dimensions of human fear are attended to, creating a robust horror ensemble. The only problem is it doesn't entirely sustain these strengths into its second half. You could say it had me in the first half.
Subtle use of sound and camera work felt very much borrowed from the same vein as "Hereditary" which is never a bad thing. Downright bizarre and inconceivable scenes regularly caught the audience off-guard and an unforgiving atmosphere of the unexpected and uneasy meant nothing felt "off the table". Characters setting a sense of control and predictability were soon overturned in horrifying fashion.
As said before, about halfway through the film the novelty of the "hand" concept wore thin, and the film ran out of momentum. This was later redeemed with a great, thought-provoking ending that leads the viewer's imagination beyond the film. You could call this, in some sense, the "Inception" of horror films; once you watch it you'll understand why it could be described as such.
7.5/10.
| 8
|
This film was the only film that I can watch number's of times. watching it again and again makes me feel fresh and motivated each time I watch it. The way Director portrayed each and every character is amazing, specially geet. this film takes you to an another world of love and ecstasy. Finally I would say what a masterpiece by Imtiaz Ali
| 10
|
Right now I'm at the end of season two and grant it I am streaming so viewers of the original airing of this series on ABC may not have so easily caught a major flaw in the premise of the show. Theoretically shield is running around doing all of this subversive coercive covert activity to protect everyone else in the world meaning you and me and those we love from people who are doing bad things or aliens who might have super powers and do super bad things, the only problem is that by the end of season two, the only thing that shield has done is be attacked by hydra attack, hydra attack itself, and run around protecting itself, or fighting its own agents. There has been almost no activity involved in the series at this point, where in we can see that shield is protecting regular folks from bad guys , this is a major flaw. It's not terrible. It's just very flawed.
| 7
|
The film is shrouded in bad CGI, bizarre music and admittedly good costume design. There is a complete lack of character development, like seriously Toby Maguire as Nick is a disaster. He does not change from beginning to end. He is plain and boring and lacks any characteristics that makes him an individual. This plays the same for the other two leading cast whose characters are soul crushingly boring.
The dialogue is even worse, there aren't any memorable scenes with characters interacting with each other they all just roll off one another scene after scene after scene.
The editing is strange, its fast and choppy (which could have been the purpose) and cuts scenes down into mere minutes. This doesn't allow any conversations to flow, characters to build or scenes to be crafted effectively. It just does not work.
The music is nice but again is just a cheap way of attracting a young audience and filling out boring scenes - which it does extremely often.
To be fair the story gains ground near the end with more thoughtful scenes and more interesting dialogue but by then its too late and the overall product has been ruined.
I really don't understand the hype over this film.
| 4
|
I knew this might be doomed when I saw so many incredible people in this cast because that always seems too good to be true. I was right. This movie was really boring. I had a hard time sitting through it but I kept holding out hope it would get better. It never really delivered. Christian Bale is amazing as always. I have no complaints about the casting or acting. They all were incredible and I wanted it to be great over all. The cinematography captured the time period and was beautiful. I think it was the script and the direction. It was hard to follow and maybe there was too much dialogue? It's one of those movies that I can't quite put my finger on what was wrong but it just didn't come together. Don't waste 2 hours of your life in the theatre.
| 3
|
This movie was very funny, dark at times, REAL!!!! The overall cast made the movie even better! Plus the Coen Brothers make great movies!!!
| 10
|
The books were hard to read or follow and unfortunately the show is as painful.
When things don't work, you have to make changes and they didn't.
We don't care about the characters whatsoever due to non chronological episodes .
The special effects are so bad that it will remind you of a bad 80s movie .(after Game of thrones, how could you give us those bad dragons?? Don't know if we should cry or laugh)
As for Henry Cavill, I can't deny he looks the part but his voice sounds so unnatural that it was unbearable and was expecting him to pass out for lack of air)
Only good things are the fight scenes.
I will give a chance to season 2 but just because the cast deserves a second chance ...
| 2
|
Among all the other sludge that has been released on the movie and tv-show front over the past few years, Wednesday is definately refreshing.
It's far from "perfect", with some strange character choices, repeating plot points, and somewhat plotholes, but overall I enjoyed it.
I'm 36 years old now, so I'm probably not the intended demographic, but even for me it was quite decent.
16 year old me would probably give this show a 9 or maybe even 10 rating.
I don't know what else to write, need to fill up some more characters in order to post this. Almost there. Just a few more. There we go..now.
| 7
|
Entertaining (but long!), however the message seems to be "be simple, don't question authority and life will be fine, be angry, politically active, and come to a bad end". Not quite the message I think is healthy to spread!
| 7
|
Visually, this movie is remarkable, great effects, its a technical masterpiece. Too bad the same care that went in to how good it looks wasn't taken with the script, the story and the dialogue. I am not a rocket scientist, but that doesn't mean I am a complete dolt. Having recently watched an IMAX documentary on repairing the Hubble telescope I learned that they have to take incredible care not to puncture the gloves, as even contact with a circuit board could breach them. Did the writers not even do a bit of research on this film? If its going to be pure fiction, why not just give her a transporter then she can beam herself home, or better yet a time machine, she could go back and save her daughter.
At about 65% of this movie I could watch no more. I really wanted to like this, 8.5 out of 10 for reviewers led me to believe it was a good movie. Unfortunately, I am of the 15% category that couldn't stand this vapid, ill conceived piece of tripe.
| 1
|
Tips
1: It is not a harry potter movie. Yes it takes place in the same universe but both the characters, the tone, the magic and the structure is completely different. So don't think that you gonna see a Harry Potter movie if so you gonna be disappointed.
2: don't expect a strong story with a clear goal. This movie is more like. One thing happened their and one thing happened then. The only plot this movie have is what you already have read.
3: This movie have some slow parts. But i can sure you you can always expecting you that things will happened again.
Thoughts
I think it was a movie a bit better than i thought(though I did'nt have high expectation about it). It has great characters and a CGI that is mostly good. Mos of the time it feels like magic that happens and not CGI and the beasts felt real. It had some really clever references to the Harry Potter universe and no one of them makes the original story less good. It had great characters and a very original screenplay. But the screenplay is also what i dislike most in the movie. I like to see movie as one combined story that all makes sense together which is something this movie does'nt have. It also have some really stupid parts like some of the jokes.
Overall I would say this movie is as good as the other Harry Potter movies. Some I like better some I like less. The 8 i give this movie is a really weak 8.
| 7
|
The scriptwriting was very sly. But I don't understand how it's nom'd for best "comedy" when it's really a dramedy. There's enough drama and great dramatic acting in this movie to melt your heart and make you think about family. We all probably have that sibling(s) who can't contribute when the family hits a crisis. And I know all too well that the girl sibling is the one who takes care of an aging mom.
Jeffrey Wright is Monk, an educated well written author who doesn't write low-class ghetto books. But as a joke and in order to make money he does write a ghetto book using every bad stereotype about black people that he can. The book becomes a best seller,much to his dismay. But it helps pay the mounting bills.
This is that rare movie where you just settle in and take it all in because the writing and acting are superb.
There are some laugh out loud moments, but there are some serious heartbreaking moments too.
There was no standout actor for me, but Sterling K. Brown transcended into the gay brother who's going through is own life problems. And Tracee Ross is always good in everything she does. Jeffrey Wright, as always carries his weight.
| 8
|
The effects are super cringe, it's just a teen series.
| 1
|
There are really few movies where you don't feel bored even if the plot is boring. There is raw action in this movie which is a treat for every action movie lover like me. Chris & Randeep did a fantastic job.
| 6
|
This is not the kind of show you'd want to look at if you were down in the dumps....dark....miserable......full of miserable characters 🙄 do yourself a favour watch Dumb and Dumber have a 😂 😂
| 3
|
This movie starts out pretty weird. Bizarre scenes and props from Burt's prosthetic eye to Valerie's obsession with shrapnel. The acting is superb, Christian Bale's portrayal of a discarded doctor and war veteran makes way for all kinds of bizarre relationships. Margot Robbie is mysterious and beautiful mesmerizing her new friends with John David Washington. Nothing makes sense but as you enjoy the journey into their lives and families things start falling into place. It's a mysterious mix set in the early 20th century with a murder mystery, counterintelligence and secret plots in our American history. The costumes and wardrobes bring you back to the era of 1930's. Very entertaining.
| 10
|
The way they start the storyline with and the movie direction not attractive also the acting is bad
I didn't finish it even
| 4
|
By the time most of you read this review, Gravity will not be in cinemas. If you haven't seen it on the big screen then you're missing out on its biggest asset.
Gravity is a special effects film. Watched in 3D and on a large screen it's easy to get so sucked into the environment that you could actually believe it's shot in space. Some of this will translate to your home television but I think it'll lose a lot on a smaller screen.
And that's bad, because the plot line underneath isn't up to much. Neither Clooney nor Bullock put in a bad performance here but the story is fairly standard Hollywood stuff which doesn't leave you caring what happens or gripped by the action
Neither of which are a problem in a cinema, where the pretty graphics are a spectacle all by themself. At home? Not convinced.
| 6
|
I'm liking it although at the same time I'm hating it, some episodes are so boring, sometimes is painful to finish and borderline unwatchable.
The level of production is as good as a big Hollywood film, but this doesn't make it less boring at times.
Cavill looks fine, I love his Gerald impersonation.
| 5
|
The blue/black white/gold dress of a movie: inexplicably, some people love this movie; others hate it. If you enjoy "kung fu meets potty humor", and like your movies low brow and juvenile, you'll love it. If you go in expecting profound and meaningful, with something to say about existence, multiverses, or achievement in life, you'll be disappointed. It's a chaotic mess of a movie that tries too hard to shock and bewilder, while missing any opportunity to use that shock to get more than surface level with its premise. It's like someone saw The Matrix, then decided to remove the philosophical ideas and change the fight scenes from visceral to silly. It's no fault of the actors, the costume makers, or photographers: the blame lies squarely on the writers whose convoluted experiment in simulating ADHD on screen is a self-indulgent mess.
| 2
|
I absolutely loved it. Margot Robbie is the perfect stereotypical Barbie. Ryan Gosling gives an Oscar-worthy performance and has a true rock 'n' roll voice. The soundtrack is also very, very good. Subjects of patriarchy and cultural hegemony are approached with humour and historical references. Michael Cera is funnily adorable. Barbie is funny and surprisingly entertaining. Greta Gerwig and Noah Baumbach wrote an enchanting script with genuine emotion. Barbie was brilliantly cast. I loved Ryan Gosling. He's terrific as Ken and delivers an Oscar-worthy performance. The ending is good and it's worth sticking around to watch the credits.
| 10
|
It not worth watching this movie. It's long movie, almost 2.30 hours. I felt like I wasted my 2.30 hrs in watching this movie. Script is very poor, story is not going in proper direction, any character come between of other character and spoil the connect you are trying to make with movie, whole story looked scattered. Avoid watching.
| 1
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.