Review
stringlengths 6
10.3k
| Rating
int64 1
10
|
|---|---|
As a true science fiction fan and a big fan of Memento, I was really looking forward to a mind-bending science fiction classic.
You can't get much more of a creative license than have dreams and dream manipulation as the main subject matter. Any Director worth his salt should be able to really put on something special and I was expecting something spectacular from Christopher Nolan.
Calling Inception an anti-climax would be an understatement. It was an utter and complete let-down. The special effects looked more suited to a music video, the character development was non-existent, the plot was simple and one-dimensional and once the movie ended the only thing that I was struggling to figure out was how on earth could so many people be so gullible.
What a missed opportunity.
If you're really looking for something mind bending that deals with dream states, dream manipulation and altered states of consciousness, try watching the superb 2009 6 part mini-series 'The Prisoner'.
| 3
|
It is really a good movie that binds you till the end with its emotional touch. The girl is really pretty. She is also a brave heart and always ready to fight for the wrongdoing.She is in the habit of writing fantasy stories. The film shows the Korean way of life with western touch. The guy in the main lead role did a very good job. It tells us the one of the philosophies of love. It also tells us about that we can pursue for the coincidence. If we want something, then we can achieve it.At last in the end, they both meet. so its a happy ending movie. Great direction. Great Acting. Great screenplay. Go for it.
| 7
|
At minute 13:00 in the movie, Captain America, the character, and Captain America, the movie, do something that is unforgivably awful. They fail to neutralize a hostile. I am not an expert in warfare, nor do I play one on TV, but the one absolute that must always, always, always happen in a combat situation is that you completely neutralize your target--you make it ineffective. So many movies and TV shows transgress this obvious rule that for media the rule should usually be the opposite--leave hostile forces hanging around, fully capable of wreaking mayhem.
But just because it's transgressed in media doesn't make the tactic forgivable much less laudable when it's done. It just speaks of poor writing. If the character needs to escape, write it in the script that he/she escaped some other way. Don't spend ten minutes showing how tactically advanced your troops are, just to have them idiotically leave a hostile ready to catch the troops unaware. That makes it look like they have stupid soldiers despite years and millions of dollars of training and advanced weaponry.
To add insult to injury, Captain America, the self-righteous, just after the 13:00 minute mark, goes on to tell Black Widow that she has jeopardized the mission despite his blunder that will, within a matter of seconds, almost cost both of them their lives.
At the moment, I can no more rate the entire movie than predict the end of the world because I haven't seen it. I have watched up to 13:23 because I had to get up in disgust and walk away from it. I have given it a neutral 5 because I suppose it will redeem itself somewhat later.
One possibility that the writers are really trying to say is that Captain America, the character is stupid, that he's an arrogant moron, a big fat loser, a washed-up has-been blow-hard. If that is the case, and I'm not betting that it is at this point, then kudos to the writers for nailing him to the wall. It's a effective way to make him look stupid and arrogant. It certainly works with the character Tony Stark in Iron Man. The character's hubris and flaws are served up for him to be knocked down and humiliated. Maybe Captain America needs it as well. I'll find out. If I can convince myself to keep watching.
| 5
|
Your gonna watch it, because it's the only thing on TV right now. It's cheap looking, I don't get the story and I don't care for the characters.
| 5
|
Review written upon completetion of season 1. First of all, I have not read the books, but I am familiar with the game trilogy, although haven't fully finished any of them. Yet. At the end of the 1st episode I did re-install "The Witcher 3" immediately. "The Witcher" series were long anticipated - I wasn't sure what to expect, wasn't sure about Henry Cavill, wasn't sure about anything really. Well, here goes:
Being a fan of medieval action, adult fantasy and such & having seen loads of examples, I'd put "The Witcher" somewhere between "Vikings" and "Game of Thrones", NOT rating or quality wise, but style, theme/s and substance wise. The first episode was, frankly, a little underwhelming (but it did end with a bang) and I fully stopped raising eyebrows only after episode three. The qualities that got introduced & remained great throughout the whole show are as follows: awesome bloody action, top tier level cinematography and FX, fitting original score, enjoyable acting performances. The qualities that improved with time: some of the characters, most notably the Witcher himself, about whom I wasn't sure of at the start. Nearing the end, I, admiteddly, had gotten quite fond of the ever-amusing Henry "Deep Voice" Cavill's awesome looking Witcher. The man has prepared, the love for the role can be felt. Did you know he also didn't use even one stunt double? The casting is pretty good, can't complain about anyone really, Yennifer and Ciri (the other two main leads) have done a great job & so has the rest of the ensemble. What always stayed more or less the same & is very likely the main fault of the series is the story. It is interesting and broad enough, and, as far as I can tell, respects the books and the games in various, both big and subtle, ways, BUT, however, it feels like a conventional, surface-level (at times) type of story. The plot sometimes develops a little slowly & never goes as bonkers as I'd want it to. It's definitely not an HBO level story, if I might say so. Also, the dialogue is often gravitating towards "bland" rather than "sophisticated" - and I don't mean to describe specifically the Witcher's dialogues. Despite my negative remarks on the story, there's one cool thing about it all that I can't quite pinpoint or put in words. Basically, "The Witcher" might be one of the few things I've seen that really justifies the word "fantasy" in my eyes - the huge variety of characters, the monsters, the names, the many little trivial things, it all does remind me of a game's world, pleasantly so. It's a little cool vibe frequently surfacing among all the story flaws. To sum it up on the plot, it's well above average television and below the greater examples. Returning to the positivities, I want to once again compliment on the action, all of it is well done, violent, awesome, just golden, and with a few diamond scenes among the gold. I wish there was more action, though, feels like there could've been a bit more throughout.
"The Witcher" is an R rated show which, sadly, sometimes feels like a pg-13 kind & I'm not talking about the any and all aesthetic factors. I was happy to realize that at the end of the last episode I really wished there was more. I hope these series do well and grow tall, there's a good foundation. And it's finally time to continue the game. My rating: 8/10.
| 8
|
When I first heard about the Barbie movie I thought it was just a silly, shameless money-grab and I had no interest in watching it. But it was given a lot of praise by critics and movie goers so I figured I'd go ahead and borrow it from the library when it became available.
What a pleasant surprise that I enjoyed it so much! These days I don't often enjoy what is considered "award worthy" (they tend to be boring or off-putting movies) or "comedic" (usually too raunchy for my liking) but Barbie truly lived up to the hype and then some. I had several laugh out loud moments while watching Barbie as well as several moments that brought me to tears.
Margot Robbie and America Ferrera were standouts; Kate McKinnon was quite funny; Ariana Greenblatt has impressed me here as well as her brief appearance in Ahsoka. Ryan Gosling's Ken was hilarious and Simu Liu's Ken was great. I found myself wanting to know more about Alan and Midge!
Most importantly I had a really fun time watching the movie. I recommend it to all women both young and old, particularly those who may have played with Barbies or had children who played with them.
I was one of those girls who played with Barbies. I didn't always have the latest Barbie doll or all the accessories and I remember being envious of my friends whose parents could afford to buy them all Barbie stuff. I remember the 80s/90s fashions as well as going through the phase of being curious about what was going on under the clothing and giving my Barbies haircuts. So I had fun seeing all the callbacks.
I think the men (Gosling, Liu, Cera, Ferrell) were all having great time poking fun at the male species.
| 9
|
With all the overly pretentious crap that passes itself off for entertainment nowadays, its great to see a TV series that just takes you on an old-time adventure. People just need to loosen up, suspend their disbelief for a few hours, and enjoy the ride. Is James Bond realistic? Does Die Hard have plot holes? Is watching 6 hours of boring people having boring conversations that are "intellectually stimulating" actually fun? I grew up as a kid watching the first series every week, and enjoying it. This is a TV adventure show, and not meant to win a Pulitzer, and hits all the right buttons for family entertainment.
| 9
|
I like this movie a lot. The cast is great, the story is great, the direction is great. The plot kind of wobbles. Despite the brilliant cast, it's not a movie that shines a bright light over each character for identification. My seatmate didn't recognize Christian Bale. I didn't recognize Mike Meyers - not a favorite - and I surely didn't recognize Alessandro Nivola.
There's the beauty of gentle, loving friendship, which is a theme throughout the movie. But there's also the ugliness of the facial disfigurements the WWI vets suffered, their use of drugs, and their abandonment by the US government; it's this that spurs the movie's action.
After the film climaxes, at a fundraising Gala for a Black regiment that's disrupted by fascist hecklers, the story is complete. It's OK to leave 10 minutes before the movie ends. Those ten minutes are a heartfelt defense of love and a sincere plea that we all pay more attention to love and art. It's a self-indulgent statement and it doesn't ruin Amsterdam, but it's anti-climactic. On the other hand, Margot Robbie has a marvelous fantasy shot that almost redeems the film's finish.
If the producers cut the last ten minutes, I'd likely give Amsterdam a 10.
| 8
|
Very boring throughout the film. They tried to show something in the climax, but did not work
| 2
|
Nice series must watch ... I enjoyed a lot.... Small episodes but it is good ...nice plot too...
| 9
|
I have to start with the good news: this is a well made show. This is undeniable. - The bad news is that if fails to suck you in. I want to be fair, I did not pay much attention to it. It just played it in the background while I was doing other stuff. But I always hear. This is how I got sucked into the world of Outlander. Treating it as a soap opera on the radio. But then the conversations intrigued me to start watching. Once you get convinced about the premise of a show, you begin finding its shortcomings charming. - This did not happen with the Witcher. It feels like it tried too hard to tick all the right fantasy genre boxes and to colonise a bit of that neurogeography fans allocated to Game of Thrones. - Cool Visual effects? Tick. Interesting costumes? Tick. Dragons? Tick. Elves and dwarfs and cool superpowers? Tick. - A Soul? I am afraid not.
| 5
|
After three attempts of watching this movie, i could not get past 40 minutes, it's just bad movie. Total waste of CGI
| 2
|
STRANGER THINGS was a pleasant surprise. It sprawled comfortably on Netflix's browsing page very recently. Needless to say, I binged all eight (8) episodes in one sitting.
STRANGER THINGS, as mentioned in several other reviews, is the "fruit smoothie" of 80s culture. Take in a tablespoon of Stephen King, a few dashes of Spielberg, and a whole lot of 80s horror/thriller culture, blend it together and you essentially have STRANGER THINGS.
To start off, the fact that this is NOT a reboot or sequel to a film or television show that debuted in the 80s time period is actually relieving. Not that I necessarily have anything against that, but this series really goes to show that an original concept can still be filled with nostalgia but have its own identity. Hopefully, that will encourage future film/series creators.
Regarding the show itself, I found myself on several occasions praising the acting (ESPECIALLY by the children), and engrossed with the plot. I can most definitely appreciate the choice of having this as a television show as opposed to a short movie. It really gave a chance to flesh things out. The plot, while relatively simple, is filled with several cliché tropes - however, they are utilized much differently, which is another thing I happened to enjoy. The "walking backwards and accidentally tripping over something" action DOES NOT lead to a death. The car engine actually STARTED. The girl actually doesn't give too much of a damn (romantically) about the nerdy/weird/outcast guy EVEN AFTER EXPERIENCING A LIFE-CHANGING SITUATION together. Again: a breath of fresh air.
My only real gripe with the show had to be the ending. However, this is all hypothetical and essentially not solid. The plot really showcases itself as a one season deal - however, the show creators already confirmed that season two would be a sequel to season 1. I felt that season one's ending should have been more conclusive as opposed to purposely leaving many loose ends to pick up in season two. HOWEVER, if season two does pick up these loose ends and thread them into something even more awesome, then it's a win-win situation and I will be happy with season one's ending. Also, to nitpick, the underlying themes of "mystery" and "folklore" seem to be muddled and messy. Individually, the themes are very strong from an episode-to- episode basis; sadly, as a whole, the show really loses these themes and you're left with a pure thriller-adventure as opposed to the cool dark sci-fi feeling.
+awesome characters
+superb acting
+engrossing plot
-possibly weak ending
-muddled direction
STRANGER THINGS - binge-worthy - 9/10
| 9
|
Serious? Such a dumb movie. Had to fast forward to be able to watch it till the end. Action at the beginning was good, but the end at the ship was ridiculous. Couldn't belive that this was a Michael Bay flic. Waste of time.
| 3
|
Tom Hanks was amazing as the movie went on it started getting weird and more political but I loved it.
Tbh i have no idea why people say this is a touching movie because it was very weird to me.
| 7
|
The Boys- with a lot more Gen Z drama and somewhat occasional cringe dialogue. All together it was good for what I was expecting. At its best it felt like it filled a void which The Boys has left through its insanely long 2 year periods between seasons and at its worst it caused me to wince momentarily but never for long enough that I felt like turning it off or that will cause me to think of The Boys as any less than I do. Even if Gen V did some things I could never see them doing in The Boys. Some characters were much more likeable than others. Sometimes you like to hate the villain. But that was not the case in this show. The characters feel slightly fake. Like you understand their motives, it's just that their motives don't make sense. It's definitely worth watching if you like The Boys despite any criticisms I have with it.
| 7
|
The first three episodes were extremely chaotic. They sprinted through Geralt's stories, depriving them of deeper meaning. At the same time, they wasted a lot of time on the plots they invented, for example Yennefer's life as an underdog and Aretusa as a cheaper version of Hogwarts. Also Ciri's plot lacked originality - she was just another bored princess without any personality. I was forced to follow her, but I didn't care about her at all, because she didn't have any charisma and they clearly had no idea what to do with her.
In general, the closer to the source material, the better it gets. The problems start when the showmakers have to fill in the gaps with their own ideas, then it turnes into another generic American fantasy series. The changes they make and the plot solutions they offer, lack subtlety.
| 5
|
Firstly, i want to say i enjoyed the film, nothing amazing like the critics and Christopher Nolan fans have made out but i think he achieved what he set out to do, with all the parameters he set himself regards to the differences with actual Dunkirk history and the filmmaking style he wanted to use.
It certainly isn't one of the greatest war films ever made, far from it but it is a decent experiment in filmmaking, if your into that kind of thing.
Me and my friend both thought it was like a good film you watch at home on a Sunday afternoon. And having watched it on the big screen i would say that thats the best way to fully enjoy it too, at home, which i would rather have seen it at. You'll understand when you see it, its just one of those films.
If you watch this in Imax like i did, make sure you take a tissue because the sound becomes unbearably loud after a little while and you may need to plug your ears up, especially when the aircraft segments start and with the bigger explosions abit later on. Even with tissues in ears its pretty loud too but its nicely bearable.
So if you do go and watch it at the cinema then i wholeheartedly recommend watching it in the standard 2D screens, mainly because of the unbearably loud volume and bassy sounds in Imax, mixed with the other film soundtrack noises makes everything sound muffled. And also because it isn't such the big visual spectacle as they've lead us to believe. Nolans previous films and those of say Ridley Scott or Peter Jackson have given more scope and reason to watch their films in an Imax screen.
Overall though, i found the film enjoyable, JUST above average. It plods along nicely for a 95 minute feature, with 10 minutes of end credits also. There isn't a dull moment in this from my perspective. Nolan does make you feel sorry for the characters he wants you to feel sorry for, but for a war film it isn't a greatly emotional one. I don't understand why its been given such high ratings as the visuals, sound, story, character development and overall feel don't warrant such grand praise. I can understand why half the audience have really disliked it for the above reasons also, as there was no storyline and there's barely a character for the audience to attach themselves to. Plus there's a lot of difference in regards to the sheer numbers of aircraft's, boats and people not present here. I did feel the grandness of the peril these boys were actually in really missing because of this scaling down from Nolan, which was his conscious choice to leave out. I have to admit that adding CGI here and there really would have given this moment of history a more realistic vision of it's devastating scale.
I expected to see really amazing choreographed air combat sequences too but they were just OK, they did the job but nothing spectacular or exciting. There have been way better and breathtaking aircraft combat scenes from most other films, war or sci-fi!
If you didn't know Christopher Nolan's intentions in his film as i've briefly alluded to above and are expecting to see an epic masterpiece of a war movie in the vein of films by directors like Stanley Kubrick, Michael Cimino, Brian De Palma, Oliver Stone, Ridley Scott, Francis Ford Coppola, Steven Spielberg or Mel Gibson, where the visuals mesh breathtakingly with story, characters and emotions then you may be disappointed with Dunkirk. Dunkirk feels more like a brief and confined moment of an evacuation, with small scale pockets of peril at its heart, and knowing that will help you appreciate this better, hopefully, but by how much i don't know, for me its a 6/10, just above average.
It's definitely not on the scale the critics and fanboys have sold it on, for a general audience! Even though i enjoyed it i still don't see how such high ratings are being thrown at this. And its a shame the film doesn't convey the epic grand scale feeling of terror that history has told us.
| 6
|
This is a Guy Ritchie movie first off. If you liked "Snatch" or "Lock, Stock.. ", you'd probably like this one. As just a movie, it is par for a modern detective buddy kick ass movie like Lethal Weapon, dressed in Victorian garb. He is supposed to be Sherlock Holmes but he's more like Mel Gibson's Lethal Weapon's Riggs, an unstable violence dealing character, than the staid, calm, thoughtful Holmes most of us are familiar with. That part is what bothers me in all these re-imaginings ala Star Trek, where some icon is turned into a ass kicking machine full of non stop stunts & special effects. Ironically, the main saving grace is Robert Downey Jr. who did a good job bringing his dissolute but ass kicking Holmes character to life. For instance, Holmes engages in bare fisted underground boxing matches, like Pitt in "Snatch", to raise money & stay fit. Okay, the old Holmes was no wimp, but he was not into large amounts of hacking, kicking & blasting that modern blubber heads demand from their heroes. Rachel McAdam was okay as some sort of Catwoman nemesis, accomplice and love aspect Irene Adler to Holmes. But even she was more like Alice from "Resident Evil" than what an upper class Victorian woman would be, with her fighting skills almost on par with our dynamic duo. Jude Law played the dandified but equally bad ass Dr. Watson, with a Felix-Oscar like tension between the two heroes over Holmes-Downey's obnoxious, dissolute ways, which was funny and added some humor.
Okay, there is some plot about some evil Lord Blackwood, played by the same guy who was the evil don from "Kick-Ass", Mark Strong. He and his upper class pals are into some black magic Egyptian like Satanic cult. He mysteriously comes back from the dead, after a well deserved hanging, to terrorize London and bring his black magic cabal into power. Well the Black Lord is scaring the bejeesus out of everyone except Holmes who is dogging him and his crew through London with the seemingly unwilling help of Watson & Adler.
In this, the movie reminds me of the far better "From Hell" which featured a dissolute but far less lethal detective, played by Johnny Depp, dogging some mumbo jumbo star chamber cult that was butchering whores ala Jack the Ripper. That movie spent some time exploring the bad part of town and more intangible magical aspects, as opposed to the detailed but utterly phony CGI London in this movie, a set that never stopped crying "High Price FAKE".
Okay, in brief, the acting made it bearable, but the perversion of such an icon, as well as the cheesy Victorian CGI set & EFX extravaganza made it lose what ever class and charm that one would expect from Sherlock Holmes.
| 5
|
Good for a one time viewing. decently funny with some serviceable action. i wouldn't recommend it but i didn't mind watching it (1 viewing 10/2/19)
| 5
|
Part 1: empty but violent, kickass, raw, uncompromising. Part 2: let's cash in. Part 3: milk that cow. Shameless, blunt, uninspired, lame. I do not care how great it looks, how big the stars are, how violent the deaths, how actionpacked the fight balets. A high rating so unfortunately another huge budget for a tedious but gorgeous follow up. Rings a bell Keanu? The matrix? "The only real mistake is the one from which we learn nothing." By Henry Ford.
| 4
|
Had some laugh here and there but it is ultimately forgettable. Mostly because of the grounded and uninspired story. You can guess what's going to happen and how they're going to happen the whole time. People shrinking and unshrinking back is what the action scenes are basically, well that and some boring car chase. It is not as generic as the first one, but it's not that good either.
| 3
|
Hello Since being a big fan of Henry Cavil, i still have to be objective. So for the: Action: This is the good part. Cavils fighting scenes are excellent. Battle sceens are unrealistic, still may be entertaining for some. And i dont even mention Nilfgard wrinkled armour...
Adventure: Script is very badly paced. Be prepared to skip parts of the show. Some dialogues are so artificial that an AI Anchor would do much better. And that includes the play.
Drama: Whole show is all about it. Either you gonna love the emotions shown. Is it fear, love, hate, greed, passion,... All scenes are based on one of it. Or if you try to keep to story, then you gonna get lost. Each scene is designed to make you feel one of it. Dont expect a complete story, which will keep you thrilled. Just loosely connected scenes.
Political correctness: In its brightest form. Fulfills all current world standards. You will see many black persons (knights, elves, ...). Women are strong, and fight back their male white oppressors. Medieval songs sound like a American show. And so on. Unfortunately all this comes at the price of deviation from the original material. Which is immense and completly not justified.
Altogether, first time viewer will see it as B-Grade film. Bad script, gameplay, even the CGI is not worth the money. And will never come up with an idea that this had such a high budget. Although considering the immense marketing campaign it is barely possible.
Ps. Anyone noticed that witcher pupils are not catlike, there just yellow
| 1
|
The most boring 3 hours. I can find redeeming qualities in most movies, none in this.
| 1
|
I always like to watch a movie on the off chance it may be enjoyable. In the case of movie series the chance you may get a bad one you need to watch the next to see if it makes up for the bad one. This series has just got worse as it went on and this is just as disappointing, It was that bad i feel asleep watching it.,
| 3
|
Overlong and surprisingly boring.
So many of the scenes really dragged and were twice as long as required. The (over) acting by some of the cast really should have been edited out or dealt with at the time. I expected so much more from the genius filmmaker but I wonder if he got carried away with the film and just missed the mark.
No other director would have been allowed to make such an uninspiring movie, it's just a self indulgent dull-fest. You can't fault the cinematography and quality of the filming but it was an hour too long and not much of a story. It could have even been made into a 2 part TV thing.
| 2
|
Christopher Nolan's first James Bond movie that's not a James Bond movie is an entertaining and sustained heist film. I feel a little distant from its main character, never really investing in his emotional journey and I feel like the intricately explained rules of the world end up getting a bit broken by the end, but none of that diminishes the movie's fun and spectacle which buoy the whole experience.
Technology has found a way to allow people to enter the dreams of a particular subject. Less than ethical types have started using this technology to steal secrets from powerful men in elaborate acts of corporate espionage. The movie begins in the middle of such a heist as Leonardo DiCaprio's Cobb leads his team to try and find the hidden vault inside the mind of Ken Watanabe's Saito's. Everything seems to be going to plan until Cobb's wife Mal shows up and messes with things, revealing the true nature of Cobb and his team to Saito directly which ends up waking him up. Cobb got what he needed, and after a switch where Saito discovers that he awoke into another dream, Cobb and his team get away safely.
Now, Mal, I think, is part of this movie's emotional distance. Marion Cotillard is an attractive woman, but her status as Cobb's dead wife who haunts him because of his guilt around her suicide some time before never feels like much more than an intellectual element of the story, a cog in the machine, even with Cobb revealing the moment of his wife's death to Ariadne, the young woman he brings in as an architect of the dreams. That scene where Cobb relives Mal's jump to the ground several stories up out of a hotel window, even with DiCaprio's committed performance, always feels more like a diorama rather than an emotional moment. In short, Mal feels like a mechanical element of the story, not something driven by the main character's emotions.
Cobb's overall motive, though, is to be able to return to America from his life on the run around the rest of the world in order to be with his two children again. This, again, is little more than an idea as Cobb doesn't get a single scene with his children, keeping the motive intellectual in nature rather than emotional. So, I feel like the emotional throughline of the film ends up a bit muted as I'm unable to engage with Cobb's journey at that level, but the rest of the movie around that is the kind of high concept spectacle that Nolan has become so expert at.
Saito had hired Cobb's team as a tryout, and he brings them on again for a new job, to incept a new idea into the son of his largest competitor to break up his father's company after his impending death. Implanting a new idea in someone's head is difficult and dangerous, needing to be simple enough to take root, but it also needs to come from the subject himself, or at least seem to. Cobb understands the dangers of it, having performed the action before, but Saito promises him an end to all of his legal troubles so he agrees.
Assembling his team is where most of the exposition happens. Nolan has this tendency to have large data dumps of information in huge blocks of his scripts. What his characters ends up describing is usually some high concept thing, so it becomes easier to take as we're learning about something new to our own experiences. Yes, we all dream, but the whole concept of building a dream, populating it with our subconscious, and then having it fall apart into violence is new, and Nolan throws actions out at the same time that can demonstrate what's being explained. As set up to the following action, this is fine. It's not great because I think there's a more elegant way to explain this and some of it doesn't need explication (like the concept of the Penrose stairs which could have been trusted to the audience to figure it out), but it ends up creating a very firm foundation for the second half of the film which is the heist itself.
Taking Robert Fischer, the son of the now dead energy magnate Maurice Fischer, into a descending series of dreams three levels deep to implant the idea is the movie's bulk and purpose, and it's a fun time. Nolan's cogs work best in this movie at this point as everything begins spinning at once, each influencing everything else in perfect timing. The changing gravity in the van that they sleep in inside the first dream level influences the second and then the third. There are objects at all three levels that need to be met simultaneously, and the editing brings them all together cleanly. The music incorporates their signal across the dreams, Edith Piaf's "La Vie en Rose", and is propulsively complex at the same time.
However, some of the logic does seem to break down. The kick, the sudden drop in one level up that wakes up the next level down, becomes inconsistent when Joseph Gordon Levitt's Arthur is awake during a kick one level up and stays awake in order to keep the movie going. I guess it could have been fixed with some line of dialogue about how his specific circumstance is an exception to the rule, but for a movie that spends so much time and effort around its rules, to have one ignored just to keep the movie going feels kind of cheap. However, we also get that awesome sequence of Arthur fighting in the rotating hallway, so worth it.
The movie's overexplained and emotionally inert, but gosh darn it do I have a fun time with it anyway. That, I think, is a testament to Nolan's filmmaking acumen as he overcomes a problematic script and makes it solidly entertaining from beginning to end. Its individual sequences are often great, but the connective tissue is weak. However since so much of the film is made up of the individual sequences the issues with the connective tissue become less important. It's a solid time at the movies.
| 7
|
The Witcher, a popular Netflix series based on the book series by Andrzej Sapkowski, has had its share of highs and lows, and Season 3 is no exception. Having recently finished watching the latest installment, I must admit that I came close to abandoning the show after the disappointment of Season 2. However, I decided to give it another chance, and I'm glad I did, as Season 3 managed to redeem itself in many ways.
Season 2 left me feeling underwhelmed, with a storyline that struggled to capture my interest. It was a challenging experience, and I found myself questioning whether I should continue watching. However, my curiosity got the better of me when Season 3 was released on Netflix. I decided to give it a shot, primarily because of my admiration for the talented actors who brought their characters to life so brilliantly in the previous seasons.
Fortunately, Season 3 proved to be a significant improvement over its predecessor. While I can't claim to have grasped every nuance of the intricate storyline, I found it to be more engaging and coherent than the previous season. The narrative was still complex, with multiple story arcs and timelines interwoven, but it was more accessible, and I managed to piece together the puzzle as the season progressed.
One of the standout aspects of The Witcher has always been its stellar cast, and Season 3 continues to shine in this regard. Every actor, without exception, delivered a remarkable performance. Henry Cavill's portrayal of Geralt of Rivia remains a highlight, showcasing his dedication to the role and his ability to embody the character with such depth and authenticity. Freya Allan as Ciri and Anya Chalotra as Yennefer continued to impress with their respective character arcs, adding emotional depth to the series.
The supporting cast and background actors deserve special mention for their outstanding work. The casting directors should be commended for their meticulous selection, as every character felt well-suited to their role, enriching the overall experience. The costumes, makeup, and set designs also contributed to the immersive world-building, creating a visually stunning and believable fantasy realm.
While Season 3 managed to win me back with its improved storyline and exceptional performances, I must acknowledge that it still had moments where the plot felt convoluted. There were times when I had to pause and reflect to fully understand the complexities of the narrative. However, this complexity is an inherent aspect of The Witcher's storytelling style, and for fans of the series, it adds depth and intrigue.
As someone who couldn't recall many details from Season 1 due to my hiatus from the series, I can't provide a comprehensive analysis of the show's evolution over the seasons. However, I do remember enjoying Season 1, and I believe it set a strong foundation for the subsequent seasons, despite my initial reservations about Season 2.
In conclusion, The Witcher Season 3 managed to redeem the series in my eyes after the disappointment of Season 2. While the storyline remained complex and required careful attention, the engaging narrative and exceptional performances by the cast, both main and supporting, made it a worthwhile watch. I look forward to Season 4, primarily because of the outstanding talent involved in bringing this captivating world to life. My gratitude goes out to the actors, directors, and the entire production team for making The Witcher a truly fantastic series to watch.
| 6
|
With the sudden rash of mass shooting, murder , etc going on in our country today, this is one movie that shouldn't have been made. We got to many crazies dope addicts that will take this movie seriously and the next thing you know their out there trying to be John Wick. It was hard for me to even pretend this movie was good. Hundreds of trained fighters died and thousands of rounds were shot and John Wick being the one they were after never once took a bullet or sliced opened with a sword. Even getting hit by high speed cars about four times, he still walks away. Unrealistic Science fiction!!
| 2
|
This is my favorite tv show. I can't wait for the next season. The story line and script is mostly good, at times inconsistent and confusing but still really good.
Watch this show!
| 9
|
Movie: My Name is Khan (U/A)
Rating : 4.5/5
It was actually long ago that I had watched MY NAME IS KHAN. It is now that I found time to write a brief review. Actually, in 2016, after watching FAN, I was very happy that SRK still can win hearts with his heart touching performances. In this case, MY NAME IS KHAN is an even older film, and it's his stellar act and the powerful script that make this film complete.
I need not to talk about the story or screenplay; it's just flawless and we'll presented on screen. The technical aspects are excellent as are in every SRK film. Talking about the performances, SRK leads the film with his towering, eye wetting performance just like the one he gave in FAN released years after this film. It's mainly because of him that even that even some dull moments look refreshing. Kajal is good as usual. Other cast is impressive as well.
The concept of the film is unique and the film demands you and your attention completely to not just watch, but feel it as well. The music is excellent and melodious. The editing is razor sharp but being a dramatic film, it could have been tighter, only in a few scenes. But that's not a complaint at all.
Overall, MY NAME IS KHAN is a well made film that is a gem. Don't miss it any cost. After watching this film, you will definitely acknowledge that SRK is not just a superstar, but a dedicated actor too.
| 9
|
This show is a comedy, mystery and light drama all in one. I LOVE it!! The cast meshes very well together and there are some moments that had me laughing so hard. Season 2 (the 🧀) was too funny.
| 10
|
It is a a good film that no one asked for. It has a average story, good performances and good CGI and visual effects.
| 6
|
These comments are based on watching the first two seasons but avoid plot details which might spoil a viewer's enjoyment of the series.
One day in 1989 forty three babies were born to mothers who weren't pregnant when the day started. Seven of them are adopted by Sir Reginald Hargreeves, a very wealthy industrialist. He raises them and it is clear that they aren't like other children, with the exception of Vanya, they each have a special power. He raises them to use their powers to fight crime but things don't go well and they each go their separate, dysfunctional ways. When Sir Reginald dies five of the children return to their family home, the titular 'Umbrella Academy'... one of them, Ben, died years before and another, Number Five, disappeared after trying to jump through time. The survivors start to doubt that their father's death was as natural as they were told. Later a young Five returns from the future warning that the world will end in a matter of days! As if trying to stop that weren't enough a pair of assassins appear to be after them.
If you like your superheroes to have great powers and fight crime in a distinctive costume this won't be for you. If however you want something different from the genre then this is definitely worth watching. The story is consistently interesting and while some major revelations aren't exactly a total surprise there are some decent twists. Our dysfunctional protagonists are all good characters and the antagonists prove to be fine too as they aren't standard evil super-villains but somewhat ambiguous and definitely more sympathetic, for the most part, than one might expect. The cast does a really solid job; particular stand outs are Robert Sheehan and the camp Klaus, who can see the dead; Aidan Gallagher as Five and Ellen Page as the 'normal' Vanya. The series has a great look with fine special effects; it also employs music to great effect. Each of the first two seasons contain separate season long plots; the characters develop nicely throughout both seasons. Overall I'd say I really enjoyed this and would certainly recommend it... I am already looking forward to season three.
| 9
|
The Dhaka in the film is surely from another multiverse. This may in future be tied up with Doctor Strange Multiverse Of Madness or something😑. And btw if Russo Bros call it cinema again, Mustafa Scorsese swears by Allah that he will shoot himself.
| 1
|
A TV series that even when life gave you 30 years spoilers, you still get tense in the unfolding of the story ...
| 9
|
Gravity.
Two astronauts work together to survive after an accident leaves them stranded in space.
Well, I'm really disappointed .
As a big fan of Sci-fi movies this film didn't feel like one, visually it is but in the big picture it felt like an action movie in the space and nothing more.
While the image was astonishing, the plot and the scrip weren't interesting, no Sci-fi concept and just a survival movie that happened to take place in the space.
I appreciated Sandra Bullock and George Clooney, but they could've put anyone instead of them since the film doesn't give much dramatically.
This just wasn't for me.
| 6
|
Just two years after director Sam Raimi shattered box-office records, wowed critics and earned almost universal adoration from audiences with the surprisingly thoughtful and wildly popular release "Spider-Man", the promise and potential of the franchise was fulfilled in perhaps the most magical of ways. That being with one of those rare sequels that was an improvement over the original in any and every way. ... one of those one in a million follow-ups that enriches the characters and story, bringing the franchise to the level of perfection. A continuation that was so strong, it could stand tall on its own, and be viewed as an incredible accomplishment even when viewed outside of its franchise.
Yes, 2004's "Spider-Man 2" is not only a sequel that outdoes the original in every capacity, but is also an immensely powerful film in it's own right when viewed as a cinematic experience. And even to this day, it rises above virtually all else to stand as one of the greatest Superhero movies of all time, joining the ranks alongside other beloved works like Nolan's "The Dark Knight" and Donner's "Superman"
"Spider-Man 2" is a masterpiece.
Peter Parker (Tobey Maguire) is having difficulty balancing his dual life as a struggling college student trying to make ends meet and as superhero Spider-Man. Things are only made worse as his best friend Harry (James Franco) holds a grudge against Spider-Man- who he blames for the death of his father, and when he learns that Mary Jane (Kirsten Dunst) is in a serious romantic relationship with another man. With so much stress on his life, Peter begins to notice it take a toll on his ability to fight crime- his powers are being negatively effected by his lack of focus.
Peter soon meets scientist Otto Octavious (Alfred Molina), whom is working on a new source of energy in the form of fusion. However, Otto's life is destroyed in a tragic accident- his wife killed and his body is fused with an experimental set of metal arms that are controlled by an advanced artificial intelligence whose only goal is to complete the experiment at any cost. Now dubbed "Doctor Octopus" by the media, and under the influence of the AI controlling the arms, Otto begins to lose his mind and resort to crime to attain the funding needed to restart his experiment... an experiment that could threaten the safety of the entire city. And so, despite his complex personal life, Peter must make the decision on whether to try and stop Otto- a man he greatly admires and respects... or give up the life of a hero once and for all.
What truly elevates this film beyond the parameters of it's relatively standard storyline is the exquisite handling of theme and character thanks to the small team of writers responsible, for Sam Raimi's continued dedication to crafting a fun-yet-contemplative atmosphere and visual style, and of course the absolutely magnificent cast.
Alvin Sargent ("Ordinary People") adapts the screenplay from a story treatment by award-winning novelist Michael Chabon and the quirky and delightful duo of "Shanghai Noon" scribes Alfred Gough and Miles Millar. (Though there is some dispute that Gough and Millar may have done uncredited work on the script.) It's an incredibly complex script, expertly intertwining themes of redemption, doubt, love and the decline and rise of personal responsibility. It strikes a fine balancing act that makes sure to give every supporting character a purpose, establishes and pays off definitive character arcs in all major players, and also grounds the film in a hyper-realistic way. Gone are the pacing problems and occasionally hammy dialog present in the original film... here, everything has a reason for being, and it fits together as an exquisite experience.
Director Sam Raimi knocks it out of the park with his guidance and visual storytelling in this installment, building off of and elaborating on the excellent work he had accomplished with the original. His kinetic sense of wonder and deep adoration for the comic-book roots of the franchise are on full display, with beautifully crafted visuals that make perfect use of movement and scene composition. He also goes very experimental in key moments to help and deliver a unique style that both compliments and occasionally contrasts with the original, maintaining a sense of visual continuity while also allowing the sequel to sort-of be its own thing. From a wonderful visual montage set to "Raindrops Keep Falling on My Head", to a delightfully perverse and eerie hospital sequence that's a clear call-back to his earlier work on the "Evil Dead" trilogy, Raimi excels like he never has. Bravo, sir.
The cast is just a revelation, effectively building and developing their characters to grand new heights with their incredible performances. Tobey Maguire is given great depth and even pathos in this installment, and he shows his acting chops with a grand portrayal of a troubled hero that still resonates to this day. Dunst is able to inject far more character into MJ, and even though you liked her in the first movie... here you finally see her portrayed as a realistic and flawed human. Franco is a blast as a man spiraling down the drain, grasping to maintain some control. Returning actress Rosemary Harris is an absolute joy as Aunt May. And Alfred Molina gives a performance that I still feel is the absolute epitome of the comic- book villain brought to life. He's emotional. Charming. Identifiable. Threatening. But most of all... most importantly... human. Molina set the gold standard for villainy with this film and I still think he's yet to be topped.
Add to that all of the incredible aspects of the production- from the wild score to the gorgeous cinematography... and you have yourself one of the greatest comic-book movies ever made. A film virtually without flaw.
"Spider-Man 2" is a perfect 10. You owe it to yourself to see this masterwork of action and emotion.
| 10
|
There's only one good thing about the movie, and its Chris Hemsworth. None of the characters have any character arc or storyline whatsoever. It's like just any another action movie. I expected a lot more but it's okay. You can watch it for some decent action and handsomeness of Chris.
| 6
|
Where do love, loyalty, friendship, kindness and democracy intersect? Amsterdam. I absolutely love this film, from the quirky and endearing characters, to the outstanding costumes, the cinematography, and the amazing writing. To the critics who just don't "get" this film, it's meant to be over-the-top and eccentric. I think you have to be a little eccentric yourself in order to see the genius of this film, it's humor and it's depth. The emphasis on our veterans is actually very touching. The nod to the oligarchy in our "democracy" is memorable. This film will always be considered a classic and a favorite.
| 10
|
This series is so basic. It great resembles Walking Dead. Dialogs are almost non existing and when they are, they are empty in content. Conection between characters? Zero, none. Spectator is lefted to ignorance as much as possible, and that is not suspense; suspense is when you know more than the characters know and you are expecting to their reaction in the scenes to what you already know as a spectator. But here you know almost nothing about the drama and much less to what the characters know. The director tries to extend as much as possible each minute, minute after minute. Even the sound recordind of voices at times is false, clearly post-recording in the studio. It's an emptiness story, or better: it's a 1 or 0 bit story, infected or not infected. That's it. Very, very doubtful how this can have a 9+ rating out a 10 or 4+ out of 5. I give this a 1 out a 5, based on the first two episodes, and it's clear we will not get any far around of this emptiness of scarring zombies.
| 1
|
First things First. This will inevitably be compared to GoT. This isn't thrones. It doesn't have quite the same budget. As such it suffers occasionally from dips in writing quality and doesn't have quite as strong a cast overall. But, it doesn't feel cheap and tacky. The lesser budget has been used well and given a chance, I can see this growing into something special.
The Witcher is a strange beast however. To the un initiated, I imagine it being a little tough to get into at first. It is packed with strange rituals, unusual behaviour and weird characters. It's use of disjointed chronology, definitely seems to have thrown some viewers too.
All that being said, at its heart is a pretty action packed and often nicely choreographed, mind bending, bit of swords and sorcerery, without straying into D&D geek territory (No offence to dungeons fans). 4 episodes in, I'm really enjoying it so far.
It's worth noting I've not read the books. so I don't know how it compares, but I have played the games. If you are a fan of the games, you'll love all the little nods to the digital version, even if you don't recognise the story or some of the characters. It also includes baths!!!
I really wasn't sold on Cavill as Geralt at first. But he has won me over, with his gruff, grunting portrayal and occasional humour. Likewise a lot of the main supporting characters, while nothing like their CG counterparts, are all solid and fall into place after a few episodes.
Don't go in expecting multimillion dollar "battle of the bast*rds" level of spectacle, and you might really grow to like this odd animal.
Edit: having watched further on. There are some issues. Each episode is directed by a different person or team. The difference in skill and experience between some of these directors is sometimes glaringly obvious. Compare the first episode, with its gritty atmosphere, solid acting and well choreographed fights, to, say, the later Dragon episode, with its average CG, terrible choreography and overall feel of an episode of Xena warrior Princess from the 90s. It's a real shame these episodes weren't spotted and refined, because they drag the show down unfairly. There are also clearly some young actors cutting their teeth on this series who need a lot more direction. Without a guiding hand their inexperience really shows and their scenes suffer. I hope this gets a second season and I hope Netflix have the good sense to up the budget, and lose some of weaker directors and actors.
| 7
|
Seat back and enjoy the fun ride! Kung Fu With a Sense of Humour
| 9
|
In my entire life I cannot recall a tv series in this category, that I enjoyed very much like this one. Which each episode I watch, the enthusiasm in me just kept intensified. Of course the story writers, directors and actors has performed some sort of witchcraft that is so powerful. And every fan will agree this theory, 'stories like this are very very rare in tv shows'. Rich in every aspect. I wish the story took more time to express it(with more episodes) and in future there will be sequels of this show. My friend, if you have watched this series, it means you are blessed to see a modern world masterpiece from own eyes. And that is a gift that many people don't get....
| 10
|
Unfortunately, like quite a few Netflix produced series, it's quite generic in every way. Cliched dialogue, very average plot and formulaic storytelling. It's been done better before, both serialised and in movie form. For me, it's not worth the investment in time so I'll look elsewhere.
| 4
|
I really enjoyed the first Iron Man movie and was looking forward to the 2nd movie when I heard that "Iron Man 2" was coming out I knew I would have to see this one.I saw it today and initially I was worried that it wouldn't be as good as the first one but personally I thought it was better than the first one.In my opinion I think this is the best superhero movie of 2010 and also one of the best movies of 2010.It was well worth the $15.50 I paid for the movie admission.
It had a great soundtrack,fantastic cast,great plot,amazing graphics,excellent director.It was very well balanced to make a great movie.It also was funny in some scenes.It was great from the beginning to the end.
I recommend this movie to all.I am already looking forward to Iron Man 3.The best Marvel movie I have seen in a while.
10/10 is my rating.
| 10
|
1)Best thing about Abhay is=> he neither under-acts nor over-acts but 'ACTS'.Hez dialogue delivery is just superb
2)Screenplay,Cinematography and direction r extra-ordinary..very rare in bollywood movies
3)No getting emotional and killing oneself over lost love,no singing songs around farms or mountains...No 'Rab dikhta hai'and all bullshit.
4)A completely different devdas to be frank bolder one .....much much better than other devdas adaptions.
5)The climax just perfect fitting to DEV.D life .
Hats off to Anurag Kashyap for making such a Beautiful movie.The beauty of the movie lies in the characters and the way they are projected to us by a superb screenplay. Also the BMW incident and DPS incident r superbly incorporated in the movie.Too much songs but dey do set the tone of the movie.
One really wants to hate the protagonist(ABHAY) for wasting his entire life boozin and takin drugs but der r times where u sympathize with him. The climax is superbly crafted.
To top it all its a well-written bad ass movie not meant for goo-die-goo-die people.
Njoy
| 9
|
The movie spams all the past to your face with no shame. Now i'm gonna judge this for what it is, a Spielberg high production movie. So with that in mind the movie is a 5/10 at BEST. I never cared for the characters and the movie never tried to make me do so, plot is ok but still not what it could be. By the end of the movie i was just waiting for the movie to be done, which is never a good thing.Usualy a good movie EVEN if i don't care from the start it manages to grab me at the end, this one did none of those very weak characters and just a typical hollywood acting, nothing to remember in the long run. My advice is, watch when you are bored and from some streaming service or rent, this is not worth any purchase.
| 5
|
Wandavision is beautiful example of paying tribute to the classics. To accomplish the feel of a 1950s era tv show, with the modern filming and story is nothing less than genius. Wandavision delivers great acting, good writing, appropriate comedy, and good story telling. In my opinion this tv show so far has been entertaining, grabbing, and well made. If you want a good story to follow I definitely recommend this show.
| 6
|
This movie is by far one of the best movies of all time! The movie had pretty much everything you need for a prefect film: Script: 10/10! OUTSTANDING! Director Sam Raimi did an excellent job giving full attention to the Dilemma of Peter Parker. He balances all the action, comedy, and drama perfectly.
Acting: 10/10. Tobey Maguire was very good being a character that doubts himself and has to choose between wanting a normal life and wanting to live as a superhero. Kirsten Dunst is very good in her roll as Mary Jane Watson. James Franco is amazing as the bitter Harry Osborn who is seeking revenge on Spider-Man. And Alfred Molina as Doc Ock is fantastic. He was an excellent choice as one of my favorite characters from the comic.
Action Sequences: 10/10. This movie has some amazing action scenes with Doc Ock on the building. But the best effect in the film is the fight between Spidey and Doc Ock on the side of the train.
Comedy: 8/10. J.K. Simmons is amazing as J. Jonah Jameson and adds a lot to the film. Ted Raimi is also very funny. The Raindrops sequence in the movie had a lot of laughs when you see Peter Parker as the nerdiest kid in the world.
This movie has everything you could ever want out of a summer blockbuster. And as far as staying faithful to the comic book 10/10.
PERFECT!!! 10/10
| 10
|
Forrest Gump is a man with low intelligence, this movie is his life journey where everything seems to work out. Starting in the 50s and ending in the 90s it takes American history and parodies it. Tom Hanks and story is very charming and goes from beat to beat well. My main problem with it is that it feels patronizing you know if you were so simple, you could very easily find your American dream. Sure Forrest gets confronted with reality a couple of times but the script magically moves him on with no trouble. The final flaw is the ending where the script twists and you are supposed to be face to face with some kind of meaning, but there is none to be found.
| 6
|
A very clever screenplay and some excellent performances from an all star cast make this a very enjoyable 2 hours plus. Daniel Craig is hilarious as the southern gentleman sleuth(!) and Ana de Armas is just perfect as the lovely nurse drawn into the farcical chain of events. This whole concept could so easily have been naff but the writing, performances and general sense of fun, together with clever twists and turns result in a bit of a triumph all round.
| 7
|
Out of all the reviews I read it seems that no one enjoys a good R rated comedy anymore. What happened to the days when everyone kept it simple. This movie made me laugh a lot from start to end. There was a lot of harsh language in this movie BUT! it was done very well. So many funny parts in the movie. I did not find myself bored at anytime in this film. I watched this movie in the hopes to enjoy myself and laugh till my sides hurt and it did just that. One of the better R rated profane comedies I've seen in the last few years. So many comedies have came out rated PG-13 the last few years and many of them was just plain dull.
If you enjoy adult humor this is a movie you will like. This movie IS NOT for children lol.
If you do not enjoy adult humor why are you here? Don't review or even rate it ffs go back and watch smurfs or whatever.
| 10
|
I watched the movie for about 40 minutes. There is nothing to arouse interest. Extremely bad movie
| 2
|
Worthless made up story of quite questionable taste. It mixes children and adult content in a way that made it innapropriate for kids and childish for grown people. Not recommended for both.
| 2
|
Everyone always wonders how some movies gain such acclaim. I wondered myself. Rated so high by IMDb users, Kung Fu Hustle seems to be the best. Now I ask the question of "Why does this suck so bad???"
Kung Fu Hustle is just awful. I saw this movie for free and I still feel ripped off. The story is that a group of gangsters called the ax gang are running a muck till they make their way to a city that stands up. All of the villagers are 100% unlikeable. All of the bad guys are lame too. The concept of martial arts and cartoon mayhem is done very poorly. If this was a tale of a one man to fight the bad guys alone, this might have been good. It is not. This is just a really stupid movie. This was so bad that I flipped the channel after forty minutes. I could not take this anymore. What an awful movie. Even while wasted, this still sucks. That's terrible. One last thing, I could have been much better off without seeing some guys ass too. I just kept on saying "PULL UP YOUR PANTS YOU DOUCHE!!!!" You will know what i'm talking about.
The Last Word: Painful.
| 1
|
I've said this before; I've suspected for a very long time that many of the reviews on IMBD are false. Just like the rest of the internet people are hired, in this case by the studios, to write glowing reviews of movies/series/mini-series. I strongly suspect that's the case here because something stinks. Way too many 10's with similar statements about this show, they all start to sound the same after a while, like the reviewers were working off a script....or a cheat sheet.
And I usually notice this with shows that really don't deserve the over-the-top glowing reviews....just like this one. The novel wasn't great, a lot of Stephen King's recent work isn't sorry to say (I really miss the days of The Stand and IT!). The novel was very basic and had a lousy ending, and this series followed suit. And since I didn't care for the novel in the first place the variations in this show aren't the reason I didn't like it. Except for one, and it's been mentioned here a lot; Holly Gibney had a very specific back story in the original King trilogy and it didn't include her being African American. Casting someone because they're an excellent actor is understandable and not the case here, casting them, and going against the original canon just to be politically correct is sad. Unfortunately it's also typical Hollywood...give this one a pass, if you've read the novel or not.
| 2
|
I really enjoyed this movie. It had everything! It was a comedy, action, had some romance...Shah Rukh Khan's performance was great and everybody else acted very well in it. The movie also had an interesting message to it about different cultures and peace. The songs are very catchy and good. For someone who does not understand Hindi, I am a big fan of Hindi films and enjoy the music-and this music is some of the best I have heard. Shah Rukh performs most of these songs in the Temptations Tour 2004. I had seen the tour and loved the songs before but now I know which movie they are from. This is a well written story and look forward to Farah Khan's next movie. I don't want to give to much away, so you will have to see it for yourself!
| 10
|
Don't get me wrong I like Tom, always have. Great actor, seemingly decent guy (overlooking the scientology). The first two Missions were good. But as they've gone on, they've gotten more and more preposterous, frankly. Each new mission outdoes the last in set pieces designed to do just one thing - show you Tom doing his own ludicrously dangerous stunts. Or fooling you into believing its all Tom all the time. No plot spoilers in this review.
There isn't much plot. Nuclear threat, blah blah. Rouge former agent turned anarchist with a personal grudge against Ethan Hunt, blah blah blah. Stupidly inappropriate humor injected at every junction between the members of Tom's IMF team. I mean, they're supposed to be saving the world, yet they can stop to piss about and quip the damn time? This one has Henry Cavil roided to hell and playing a dumb thug with a neck bigger than his head. Over hyped and over rated. I was playing with my phone forty minutes in, to be honest. I give it a 5, for the obvious work put in to make this. Story wise however? Very weak and absolutely nothing new or remotely innovative.
| 5
|
Spider-Man 2 does what is rare in a sequel--it's better than the first film. I still love the first movie, but this one has more depth, more heart. I like Doc Ock much better than Green Goblin (although he is so creepy), and seeing more of Jamison was a treat as well. But especially enjoyable was unmasking Spider-Man--getting to see the actual facial expressions as Peter (as Spidey) struggles with losing his powers, stopping the runaway subway, etc.--that's what was truly wonderful. Peter's struggles are what make this movie so great. Tobey Maguire's eyes say it all as poor Peter faces one dilemma after the other. Finally a movie about a superhero gets it right (all the Batman movies just didn't get that we wanted to see stuff about Bruce Wayne's struggles as Batman--not special effects and villains out the ying yang). And the opening credits were awesome! I have seen the movie twice already and look forward to seeing it again.
| 10
|
The desire to make one long endless tracking shot seriously interrupts the story. For example, when the soldiers are crossing through corpse strewn battlefields we get only a brief glimpse of the carnage. A pause to consider the broken body parts would help serve the story, but instead we get only a peripheral look.
| 3
|
Episode 4 and 5 are by far the best of the season and deserve 5 star rating. The show just kept going downhill after that.
The actual story was condensed to work in unnecessary side filler plots.
The many flashback scenes scattered throughout the series lasted way too long and barely moved the plot forward. We didn't learn anything in 30 minutes that couldn't have been summed up in 5. It was boring.
The pacing of the series was completely off. The entire thing either felt like a drag or rushed.
The filler episode (Episode 3) was okay but i didn't particularly enjoy it and it's completely irrelevant with the rest of the plot so feel free to skip.
I did however really enjoy the dynamic between Joel and Ellie throughout.
| 6
|
Awesome, Stupendous, Superb Act and Out of Box concept.!!! For me its 10/10.
Kangna Ranaut did an unexpected performance. She has single handed taken the movie to her shoulders and taken it up to the level where it can't be beaten.
Furthermore, the act was flawless and seems all genuine in every part of the movie.
Supported casts too did a great job from typical Punjabi's's style to international friends.
The FB time-line in the end takes it to a superb ending.
I am going to watch this movie again.
| 10
|
Sherlock Holmes (Downey) and Doc Watson (Law) have to figure out how bad guy Blackwood (Strong) who was just hanged and buried, was recently seen wandering around the cemetery, and what is he up to?
What have they done to Sherlock Holmes? They try to make him into an Action Hero. Who's next? Archie, that Drew Girl, Tom or Huck, Anne of whatever, Charlie Chan (not to be confused with Jackie Chan)?
Because of the promos, I knew I would have reservations about this film. I didn't want to see Sherlock Holmes as an Action Hero. I liked him the old way, serious, calculating, proper, genius level, well-dressed at all times with proper manners. Here they have him most of those things but looking and acting like a slob most of the movie. And, they had him a fighting member of some Fight Club for lack of a better explanation. Not my idea of Sherlock Holmes. Not anyone's idea. Sir Arthur is revving up for a twirl.
What was good? The cinematography was outstanding. The acting was good all around. The stunts were okay as were the CGI. It was kind of good to see Watson not be the passive sidekick we saw from the TV shows and Sherlock Holmes movies of the past.
The dialogues were good, but the clarity of them by Downey suffered. Since S. Holmes was English, and Downey is not, they had Downey talk light speed so you wouldn't notice he didn't have an English accent. Guess his English accent wasn't good enough and they decided to go with fast-talk-muttering. Many, many times I muttered to no one in particular, "Whadee say?" See? Jude Law, on the other hand, was clear as he is English.
What was bad? Most of the movie was shot in the dark. Too many fight scenes. Understanding Downey was difficult. And, worst of all, the movie was tooooo long
.and tedious. I couldn't wait for it to be over. I didn't care for or have any sympathy for any of the characters. As for humor, there was very little of it. Sir Arthur is gaining speed toward full twirl.
When Mary (Reilly) and Irene (McAdams) were on the scene, they were a breath of fresh air to this too darkly lighted movie.
Not really of any consequence, but: Holmes never wore the hat with the bill in front and in the back; Holmes never smoked the curvy pipe we were used to seeing – here it was a straight barrel.
As Archenemy Professor Moriarty was mentioned at the end of this, a sequel seems to be in the works. Oh, no ! I can't take another one. I believe Sir Arthur Conan Doyle is now in full twirl.
Violence: Yes. Sex: No. Nudity: No. Language: No.
| 5
|
Shameful use of the original concept. Zachary Levi is really good, however by script or by his intervention he made 14 year quite sensitive and well grown on his own foster kid into a amazing moron and useless pompous bully. Black Adam animated or any previous incarnation is way better than even a best part of this movie. By his behaviour in movie he would not be picked up as choosen one in slightest means of the sense of choosen. Self centered; pompous; immature; screw up off a child who steals and lie or cheats to his own advantage and goals no remourse or even slightest role model for anyone.
Shameful adaptation of a great source material. 5/10 as there are some small parts which were good, the rest is pure .... waste of time. Am so glad I did not go for it to cinema; do note lose money on this....
| 5
|
As dramas go it's ok. But sadly the last episode kind of knocked back my rating from a 9 to a 7. The acting, in parts, is good and there are some good moments of tension. That said, the conspiracy theory that ran through the episodes ending up being weak and a bit lazy in my opinion. Still worth a watch though.
| 7
|
Bogus content, pro jihadi and full of blunders. The makers have gone made and replaced the Islamic terrorism with elements of Hinduism. Makers seems to have soft corner for Islamic terrorism, ISIS, Idea of jihad and hatred toward the Hinduism.
| 1
|
Finally a GOOD Steven King adaptation... great acting and gripping script Totally worth binge watching For me 8/10
| 8
|
Kay and Peele are tremendous actors. It's an underrated show.
| 10
|
This was an unexpected yawn. The first Doctor Strange-movie surprised me with how good it was. The character Doctor Strange is one of the least interesting ones of the Marvel Mcu's big league, but that movie worked because of a good story.
This time, the story is a complete mess. A lot of waving of the hands to summon CGI. Elizabeth Olsen and Cumberbatch are both good but they can't save this. I just found all plot lines kind of blah.
Top of mind, this is my next to least favorite MCU-movie so far (beating Shang Chi). Still, it's not a complete train wreck but it's not worth more than 4 stars.
| 4
|
The writers in Hollywood have completely lost their artistic imagination and touch. Every show and movie continues to be a promotion of hedonistic life. Everything is pointless view. They reinforce this by destroying the body like a meat puppet repeatedly. The story itself is nothing. A reinforcement of life being a pointless lustful violent exchange. It truly is depressing. At least the show's storyline keeps you engaged enough to finish the show. Somehow in the satanic propaganda being constantly thrown at you the show still makes you want to see how it ends. It's probably worth 2-3 stars for that. Truly a drain on the soul to watch this anti-Christian hate filled pile of propaganda.
| 2
|
Knowing the full history of the event, this movie is more about American pride and heroism than cars. As an huge racing fan and a Formula 1 fan whom enjoyed the original Grand Prix and Rush, this movie does not hit the spot, rather childish.
| 5
|
I loved it, I especially loved Will, and the Robot. Quite different to the movie and old series but had its own charm.
| 9
|
It's not bad for the limited characters they had access to. Main thing I didn't like is that carnage and kletus are seperate entities like Eddie and his symbiote, but the thing in the comics about carnage that was cool was that the symbiote bonded to him so fully that they were a singular entity and even used "I" rather than "we".
| 7
|
I saw the trailer for the movie that should hit the theaters in a few months and was very excited. I'm not sure when was the last time I felt that way about a movie, bur whatever. :) The story, the premise, the characters, the locations... everything looked really good that I had to see where this inspiration came from.
So I got all three seasons of the cartoon and watched them back to back, within 4 days, and was blown away. I haven't been a kid for some time now so I don't watch a lot of cartoons much, but what Michael Dante DiMartino did here is pure genius storytelling that sits well with all age groups. Characters actually develop, they have depth, the story is compelling and makes you want to watch more. As they move on, the episodes get way better, more confident and there's this sort of natural progression of things. I'm not sure what else to add, besides go watch it. While the show may be aimed at a younger audience, there is plenty of material older folks can think about if you can get over the occasional 5yo jokes. ;)
Its probably the best cartoon series of the last decade and it deserves praise. I am hoping the movies are gonna be equally good, deep and rich and not just some soulless crap Hollywood produces these days.
Get it, watch it, open your mind and if you don't love it... well, I can't help you there. :)
Orion
| 10
|
I liked the first episode, although I'm not sure about some of the actors ability to bring what is needed for their parts. However, I am going to wait and see how it turns out at the end of S1. I am definitely NOT comparing it to GoT, because clearly, it is not the same story. It is 172 years before and a whole different family, time, setting, etc. My hope is that it will evolve and grow to be a great telling of the Targaryen family, their troubles, and what happened to the dragons in more detail. I think if people wait and see how the show progresses their opinions will change. Then again, they may just be too wrapped up in GoT that they can't remove it from the equation and see it as a stand-alone series.
| 8
|
The movie hits just the right spots. It is a movie that will keep you glued to the screens.
The suspense is maintained till the last second. There is always something that surprises you. There is always something unexpected coming up.
The dialogues are really catchy and apt. No joke is too much. It is a perfect dark comedy. The songs are good as well.
Brilliant Cast! Fantastic Characters! Exemplary Acting! Rajkumar Rao is amazing as well. Huma Qureshi was the perfect Monica. Radhika Apte as an ACP is quite interesting.
Great Work by Vasan Bala and Matchbox.
I highly recommend you all to get your popcorns and just Netflix & Chill with Monica O My Darling,
| 9
|
No doubt the execution was great. But the story was boring. Gods fighting gods? What are the rules here? What makes one god more powerful than another? How do you kill a god? What are the limits to their power? It feels like the writers are just making it up as they go along. Oscar Isaac did great. The production was solid. But I have a hard time rooting for the hero when there are no rules to the game.
| 4
|
This movie was all fun and games until spider man dropped a boogie bomb on doctor otto and cranked out 90s on his head. he then dropped down with a 360 oggga booggga boooga and one pumped that doctor back to the black death.
| 1
|
Hell was it boring for most of the movie, but the last 10 minutes or so made up for a lot of the agony in waiting FOR SOMETHINGI mean ANYTHING to happen.
| 5
|
I love every single story but sometimes they move very slowly so that's why I give them 8 points. But these are worth watching
| 8
|
American Made, based on the true story of Barry Seal, a former pilot who became a CIA operative and ultimately a drug smuggler for the Medellin cartel, delivers a captivating and thrilling cinematic experience. Tom Cruise delivers an exceptional performance as Seal, capturing his larger-than-life persona and immersing himself in the role with remarkable authenticity.
The film's narrative is expertly crafted, seamlessly blending thrilling action sequences with moments of humor and suspense. Cruise's portrayal of Seal's transformation from a self-assured pilot to a notorious drug smuggler is captivating, and the film's exploration of the gray areas of American foreign policy and the allure of wealth and power adds depth and complexity to the story.
American Made is not just a thrilling action-biopic; it's also a story about ambition, greed, and the consequences of our choices. Tom Cruise's performance is nothing short of phenomenal, and the film's narrative is consistently engaging and suspenseful.
| 7
|
Well what can you say about this mess, the critics have obviously felt pressured into liking this movie for some reason or another, and they are going to cost a lot of people their hard earned money, and give most of them a huge disappointment. I love marvel super hero movies, this was a B-movie at best, like something swept up from the cutting room floor and thrown out the door. Under any other circumstance this movie would never be released, it is completely sub-par for marvel's current high standards. Representations of Africa and Africans were childish, cartoonish and patronising, and reminded me of 1920s safari brochures or victorian era stereotype propaganda, just a farce. A missed opportunity and once the real reviews start making the headlines and word of mouth spreads as to how bad the acting, story and dialogue are, it will single handedly destroy any chance of a similar film being released for the next 20 years. Just a boring movie, very poor quality for marvel and total disappointment. This will be the only time you see black panther movie so if you really feel the need to waste your money, you had better see it, because there won't be a sequel.
| 2
|
A brilliant companion to the first film, "The Godfather Part II" follows the Corleones into the late fifties, when the family business, as well as the family itself, undergoes changes. Don Michael Corleone, played by Al Pacino, delivers a very convincing performance alongside Robert Duvall as Tom Hagen. The story is crafted to fit the times and also to help define the characters and show their growth, and in some cases, their demise. When it's all finished, "The Godfather Part II" is thoroughly satisfying and moving. An exceptional film.
| 9
|
After a stellar season one expectations for the second season were obviously high.
Now, don't get me wrong: the Tennant/Sheen couple is still a major factor and the setting and the story are quite interesting, but at the end of the day this season is just a linear story with predictable twists and no surprises.
We were treated with a first season where you could expect anything, memorable one-liners, sillines far beyond the 11-mark on the Python scale, but most importantly : all round originality.
Season two is a mix of romance, angels' and demons' dull politicking and a bit of humour - which in my opinion doesn't even hit the martk all the time.
After a while it gets a bit boring, still kind ok but simply doesn't hook you and doesn't make you erupt in laughter every other scene, so that's definitely a huge jump down the scale after the effervescent season one.
My rating is hence full marks to season one and just above average for season two.
| 6
|
They say you get what you deserve, and I think the success of Avatar is indicative of Hollywood's opinion of the average film-goer. Sure the special effects are spectacular and the planet setting is beautifully realized, but in terms of narrative and character strength, the film is sadly lacking.
Coupled with it's heavy handed message, for me it perfectly represents Hollywood's feeling about it audience: if we whack enough bells and whistles on it and build up enough hype, they'll come. I like to think that today's audience is more sophisticated than they are given credit for. I just wish the box office figures backed me up.
| 3
|
I know people seem to love this film, and you know, more power to them. But there's just something about it that rubs me the wrong way. I'm all for minimalism... being slow to reveal what happens in your story, etc.... but this film had nothing. It was nothing. It was a completely autobiographical piece where Sofia used Ms. Johansen as her doppleganger to complain about the distant relationship with her then-husband, and to comment on human loneliness.
But there's a good way to comment on human loneliness, and a bad way. This, undeniably, is one of the worst ways. Static, quiet stretches where nothing interesting is happening. sure, its artsy and pretentious, but it doesn't really prove anything except that the writer is uncreative, both in her subject matter (a vacation to Tokyo) and the way she spends her time (inane nothingness, rather than productivity).
Much like Was Anderson, this film seems to revel in wasting Bill Murray. A comedic genius, he is degraded into acting bored for almost three hours. Why is this? Why do people think Bill Murray acting bored is funny? The man is capable of great things, yet unimaginative hacks make careers on sticking a camera at him as he deadpans. Its insulting.
I do not truly think this movie deserves a "1," but with so many people who want to appear intelligent or "with it" giving it a "10," I feel its my place to offset it. Much poorer than most people would have you believe, and utterly uncreative. It made me wish Sofia Copolla had never been born.
| 1
|
I loved the first season of this show and was really looking forward to the second season. I barely made it through the first episode. So boring. The second season starts out seven months after the end of the first season, I guess they just decided to skip all the stuff that would actually be really interesting, like them crash landing and setting up base, overcoming problems, ect. Nope, none of that, instead we get a cringeworthy Christmas scene.
There was some action and some attempts at drama, but it was not at all interesting. It was more like, "Oh they are going to do that now? Ok. Ho hum."
The first season I binge watched in one sitting. In contrast it took me three hours to finish the first episode of the second season because I kept pausing it to browse reddit because it was sooooo boring. Maybe in a week or so I'll try watching the second episode, but I'm not looking forward to it.
| 6
|
I've never played the games, I know it's still new but I might as well just watch the white lotus. Atleast the white lotus keeps me intrigued with shock factors. Like, it's missing something that I'm sure will come to fruition but that's not how you draw viewers into a franchise they've never known. I barely have played a video game (less than 30yrs old) because I love movies/miniseries. It just seems so lacking to gain footing. Everytime I look at it, they're just talking about something, would be nice if "something" happened a bit more frequently. It was so hyped up on HBO, and they play it so much I'm getting bored already.
| 5
|
A rich elderly writer (Christopher Plummer) commits suicide and his combative family (including Jamie Lee Curtis, Don Johnson and Chris Evans) line up to see who gets what. But was it really suicide...or murder? Detective Benoit Blanc (Daniel Craig) starts investigating.
Good mystery. It's full of twists and turns and has some funny moments. Also there's some stunning production design--LOVE the house Plummer lives in. There's also a large great cast giving good performances. No one is bad but Craig, Curtis and Evans are excellent. Still I didn't love it. It's a little too long and gets needlessly convoluted at the end. Also a lot of the humor fell flat and some of these characters are really vicious. Still it's worth seeing at least once for the cast alone.
| 7
|
The present day is its own beast, with its uniquely divided political climate, a generation with an obsessively self-centered need for validation, vain platitudes that swing so absurdly far that it ends up being offensive in the opposite direction - all ripe with opportunities for satire that Cord Jefferson's "American Fiction" masterfully capitalizes on.
The brilliant Jeffrey Wright leads the charge as Thelonious Ellison, a writer frustrated by the Limousine liberal elite's constant need to define the Black existence by it's most unsavory caricatures - where stories are deemed "not black enough" if it doesn't include gang violence, deadbeat dads, police brutality and all that. He then decides to anonymously write an absurdly over-the-top blacksploitation novel with all the tropes he despises to prove a point, but is surprised when the low-hanging joke goes right over everyone's heads becoming a chart topping best-seller for all the wrong reasons.
While "American Fiction" is a brilliant satire, exposing the absurdities of the pandering present, it makes sure to not just stop there. It's also a touching family drama as if to prove a point against that which it satirizes. The movie never feels excessive or unnecessary and stays well aware of when it might get a little too carried away. It sure does have its faults, but it's nonetheless an entertaining and thought-provoking watch.
| 8
|
To watch Devs is to watch one TV show be slowly consumed by another. It initially presents itself as adhering rigidly to a central scientific principle, its exploration of which was clever and thought provoking. But as the story unfolds, it seems to want to examine every interesting scientific principle at once, while not paying attention to the ways in which they contradict one another. The plot of the show was no longer being used to explore the science of the world, but the science of the world was being used to create dramatic moments and spectacle which chipped away at the show's internal logic.
Perhaps most of my problems with the progression of the show come from personal bias. It starts by presently a view of the world I strongly agree with, then introduces ideas which (to me) are much less scientifically plausible, choosing by the end to abandon the central principle I thought was holding the show together. But, as is visible from my score, I still liked the show overall and found it worth my time - even if it doesn't follow through on all its pledges, it nonetheless delivers an engaging story with likeable characters, and gets you thinking about the concepts it couldn't quite wrap up on its own.
| 7
|
After all the hype I watched this on Netflix with my wife. I like cross genre stories but only when the story arc is strong and themes are harmonized. The biggest failure here was the lack of cause and effect. When the humans turned into zombies and said the unseen savage entities were beautiful--that was incoherent. We saw nothing or beautiful in the unseen evil.This aspect reminded me of the Blair witch project with clueless characters running in the dark woods with web cams. The drama of Sandra Bullock's character fighting to save two kids was the best part of the film. Her personal transformation in the fight of good vs evil was muted by the action. There was a lot of convenient coincidence in the story, like the OB GYN doctor appearing in the final scene in the big bird sanctuary.
| 3
|
Doesn't show the immensity of the rescue operation, very small scope view. Alot of the story surrounding just a few soldiers. Doesn't come close to showing the magnitude of the operation to rescue over 300,000 men with the help of over 800 civilian boats.
| 3
|
I came away disappointed as I had been looking forward to this film for a while. I will try to avoid spoilers, but will say that there was not a single swastika, no reference to Nazis (or even Germany for that matter), and virtually no close up view of "the enemy." Is this the new form of whitewashing history, and pandering to the ever growing sensitivities of an overly politically correct entertainment industry? At any rate, aside from this same annoying trend that ruined Captain America and Wonder Woman, there was no emotional depth to the movie whatsoever, both in terms of the characters or action. Worst of all, there was an artificial feigned sense of selflessness among the main characters on several occasions. Movie on the whole just fell flat.
| 6
|
Now You See Me is the sort of movie that relies entirely on spectacle and style without much of anything underneath the surface. The plot centers around a band of Robin Hood-esque illusionists with an affinity for robbing banks and the team of FBI agents tasked with bringing them down.
We are first introduced to our protagonists, a group eventually called The Four Horsemen, through a look at each of their individual acts. The movie fails, however, to develop any of them beyond these lifeless, cardboard cut-outs. The same is true for the rest of the cast as well. There's a pair of bumbling FBI agents, a washed up magician aiding the feds, and the Horsemen's benefactor who are never given enough depth to make for really compelling characters.
This movie does contain some relatively cool tricks, but some are a bit too grand to be believable. One in particular involving Isla Fisher floating above a crowd in a giant bubble is a tad ridiculous. All that being said, it's entertaining enough to pull you along for the ride and it can be a pretty darn fun ride at times as long as you don't look too closely.
| 6
|
So I finally got around to watching this movie with all the hype and awards, and now I just feel irritated and like I need a Xanax. I get that it is supposed to show the dangers of gambling addiction and the desperation it can cause, so maybe the movie is supposed to leave you feeling depressed. But I'm more mad that I just spent over 2 hours watching characters I hated make one bad decision after another, only to get a terrible ending. I can watch some very difficult and unsettling movies and actually feel a meaningful sense of despair and contemplation afterward, but this one just left me feeling like I developed an ulcer during it's runtime. Props to Adam Sandler for doing well in a more serious role I guess (by doing well I mean making me hate his character). I've been sitting here trying to think of something good to say about the movie, but other than the acting, I'm really struggling. Other movies that are rough to watch and have difficult endings (e.g., Requiem for a Dream, American History X, etc.) at least leave you feeling broken in a meaningful way. This one just made me pissed.
| 4
|
The cinematic equivalent to tossing dozens of awesome comic books in a blender with a heavy budget and pouring it out into celluloid, Civil War is not only a superb sequel and improvement to the Avengers films, but just might actually become the best MCU flick yet. And yes, the movie is extremely bloated. Yes, the movie becomes a bit of a downer especially after funnier offerings like Ant-Man and Guardians of the Galaxy. But once the wheels start turning and the conflict shifts into the second act you will be enthusiastically entertained up until the final scene.
Civil War is honestly Avengers 2.5, but the half is only in terms of chronological order. In the third Captain America installment, the events from past Marvel offerings has the world afraid of the superheroes, and over a hundred nations want to be able to monitor and control where the Avengers goes and what they should do after an espionage mission gone wrong. This creates a rift between all the heroes, especially with Winter Soldier being a fugitive and another threat lurking within; and differing opinions on how to handle the situation. Civil War's biggest strength is the sheer amount of characters; as they bring back all the Avengers, and then threw in some new additions.
Black Panther was flawless in performance, visuals, and execution. Second-billing favorites like Ant-Man, Falcon, Black Widow (who deserves her own movie) and Hawkeye make an appearance and also greatly deliver. Lastly, Spider-Man undoubtedly steals the show and he barely makes an appearance here. After 14 years of cinematic Spider-Man appearances, Marvel truly gets it right this time. Unlike what happened with Age of Ultron (entertaining yet forgettable), you will be excited for future features based off the new characters you meet within the 150 minute timeframe----especially Spider-Man. Sadly not all the Marvel personas get enough screen time, but it's part of the sacrifices made when there is such a long guest list to the motion picture party.
The chemistry within the MCU is off the charts, and Civil War raises the bar even higher. What DC films are missing is this key element; mostly because we barely see any character development and consistent cast from sequel to sequel. The interactions between each of the heroes is what really allows this movie to go to the top tier of comic book mayhem, as even Bucky has his moments when involved with the others, especially (surprisingly) Falcon. The complicated relationship between Iron Man and Captain America is front and center, and both deliver spectacular performances as two guilt-ridden heroes desperately trying to avoid conflict even though all signs point to a clash.
Helping Civil War maintain its bite is a strong (and rather gloomy) script and flawless direction from the Russo Brothers, who have impressed mightily since their debut with The Winter Soldier. The film honestly has it all: deep themes, lots of loss, plenty of surprises, tons of drama, tons of action, controversial decisions, and a good amount of humor to mix it all together---even though we really could have used more jokes in the first act. The action scenes range from clever to intense to downright entertaining. The Airport Battle will become a part of Marvel movie history, I promise you. The scene will be embedded in your memory if you are a fan of the comics. Then there's the incredible Bucharest Chase that's the best chase since Raid 2. At the same time, the final fight will break your heart.
Painstaking amount of effort is given to not only making these characters come to life, but also making them likable and relatable. Marvel does a fantastic job picking the right staff behind the scenes, and does even better picking the actors and actresses to represent the MCU. Combine that with a proper budget and an extremely tight structure that connects all the films together and always leaves room for the upcoming sequels and you have a systematic series of films that resonates with the worldwide audience. Captain America: Civil War is now the peak result of this formula, as this is the first mega Marvel film since the original Avengers to appear to not pull any punches and maximize the content with the pieces allotted.
As a comic book fan, there's no way you can walk out disappointed. And as a summer blockbuster fan, you will also have a lot of fun while simultaneously think about the events that occurred long after the final punch is thrown. Civil War is absolutely fantastic, and among the best comic book movies of all-time. DC, you need to watch this and take notes.
| 9
|
The writing, the action, the jokes, the pacing, the acting - All of it is a substantial step down in quality from what we're used to in a typical Marvel production. Suggest skipping it.
| 5
|
I don't post reviews on IMDb much but once in a while I come to see a movie which compels me to write one and let others know of this masterpiece.Such is the greatness of this movie My Name Is Khan.
Preview:This movie is about a man named Rizvan who embarks on a journey all across United States of America just to prove his love and that he is not a terrorist.
Direction:This movie is directed by Karan Johar who has given masterpieces like Kuch Kuch Hota Hai,Kabhie Khushi Kabhie Gham,Kal Ho Na Ho etc and yet this time nothing less was expected from him.He is very sincere to his work.He directs a movie and takes his time to move on to next movie but his work is nothing but pure class and hard work.He direction is very good in MNIK(My Name Is Khan).Set in America this movie shows his hard work.He has done a great job.He always knows what he wants from his actors and his writers.
Acting:This whole movie is driven by non other than Shah Rukh Khan.Ifit wasn't for him maybe this movie wouldn't have gotten this mush praise and hype no matter how great direction was because the character of Rizvan is such a complicated character that nobody could pull this off.He put in a a lot of hard work preparing for this character.His acting is just unbelievably awesome and upto the level of Leonardo DiCaprio and Jack Nicholson. And then comes Kajol who is evergreen as always. She nails her character very much and gives her best.
Story:Writers did a great job because writing something like this is very difficult job but they did really very well.
Music :An other great aspect of this movie is its soundtrack and other songs which add even much soul into movie.
Overall:At the end its a much watch for everyone cause something like this is out there and you are missing it.So go now grab a DVD and get yourself mesmerized by this masterpiece.
| 10
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.