Review
stringlengths 6
10.3k
| Rating
int64 1
10
|
|---|---|
Season 3 was hot garbage. Seem like a total betrayal of all the characters. If you like The Umbrella Academy dont watch this season. Lets just say that it seem like the fired alle the writhers and hired a monkey.
| 3
|
If you want to see 120 minutes of beautiful camera work and great scenery this movie is for you. BUT... this was no more than watching my grandchildren with a video game! Not even a great game! The premise was good BUT the action that followed was similar to a looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong car chase! Too bad such an interesting premise was elooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooongated into two and half hours. The first 15 minutes were provocative and the last 15 minutes were interesting BUT the two hours in between felt like six hours. I do not recommend this movie for thinking people, only if you have two and half looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong hours to spare. Otherwise, go see a good love story.
-Movie critic par excellence
| 7
|
Russell Crow's son Chris doesn't know how to act. So sad. :(
| 1
|
" How do you do, fellow kids "
Gen V is like 50 yr old Hollywood writers trying to relate to the youth and doing a god-awful job at it. College is not all about pot, intercourse, gossip and the like. This cliched Hollywood trope has been unrelatable and wrong since it's inception.
So far this show is all about needless gore for shock value ( which is never shocking cause something violent happens scene after scene making the gore predictable ), needless and perverted sex scenes, constant swearing as if they used urban dictionary as a basis when writing the script, ear rape rap music, too many pop culture references ( which is gonna make the show age like milk ), no engaging premise at all and awfully bland characters.
The main character is unfriendly, narcissistic and as likable as a case of crabs, however everyone is interested in her. They all want to befriend her. That's not how reality works. Her abilities also don't make sense. Won't she run out of blood or get lightheaded and dizzy after spurting out man juice all over?
Gen V is Hollywood being edgy and trying it's best to appeal to the youth but failing in an epic manner. At least the boys had colorful and grounded characters like Butcher, engaging drama and some hilarious writing to lighten things up. Gen V lacks it all.
| 1
|
Probably Tarantinos worst film. No plot to speak of. Long, meandering and needless scenes throughout. Worst of all it doesn't have any decent dialogue, which is the one thing that can usually be expected at least.
| 4
|
They tried! The first season was really good and close to the books. The second season just didn't work as well and the acting didn't seem as good all around. Still enjoyable if you are into shows like this.
| 7
|
It's been five years since we said goodbye to Harry Potter and the wizarding world in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2. With the way Hollywood is now, I'm surprised it's taken Warner Bros. five years to return to one of their most lucrative properties to see if they can bleed it dry.
Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them is a film based on a textbook written by J. K. Rowling within the Harry Potter universe. The textbook is one written by Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne) and is pretty much an encyclopaedia of creatures that he's documented on his travels throughout the wizarding world.
When Newt arrives in 1926 New York, he does so carrying a suitcase full of magical creatures. After a mix up with Jacob Kowalski (Dan Fogler), Newt loses the case and as a result, a number of the creatures escape and run amok in New York. While trying to track down the escaped creatures, Newt must evade the clutches of Percival Graves (Colin Farrell), an Auror working for MACUSA (The Magical Congress of the United States of America), trying to protect the wizarding world from human discovery.
It's definitely fun returning to the wizarding world and Rowling has written an entertaining enough story however, my problems with Fantastic Beasts lie with the fact that there is barely any introduction given to this time and setting in the wizarding world. It was something that Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone did so well, laying the foundations for the rest of the series however, that was the world of Hogwarts and this an entirely new setting.
We're just thrown into this story with Newt tracking down the creatures and nothing else that happens around this main story is explained very well at all. It's certainly an adventure that is fun to watch but I felt the setting needed a bit more depth, considering this is going to be a series of five films. Don't even get me started on the finale of this film, which becomes a ball of confusion thanks to an unexplained revelation and an incoherent set-piece involving a rampant black cloud (known as an Obscurus).
Which leads me to the special effects on show in this film, which for the most part are very good. The majority of the creatures are well designed and brought to life through wonderful effects, even if they aren't all that fantastic. In places though the CGI looked a tad messy, particularly in the finale I've mentioned previously.
Unlike the Harry Potter films, Fantastic Beasts doesn't have the likable characters to lead the film. The performances are good enough but the characters were a little lacklustre. Newt Scamander is a pretty weak lead character for a start and Eddie Redmayne doesn't really do enough to make you like him, leaving this as a Redmayne performance somewhere between the heights of The Theory of Everything and the very low depths of Jupiter Ascending. Dan Fogler's effort as the comic relief of the film is admirable but he doesn't do much else other than make weird faces and noises.
Katherine Waterston and Alison Sudol play a pair of sisters who Newt meets during his time in New York but I can't help but feel Waterston is massively wasted in a very limited role, as is Colin Farrell as the mysterious Graves. Much has been made of Johnny Depp's casting announcement in this series and his appearance here leaves me fearing the worst for the rest of these films.
Warner Bros. initially announced Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them as the start of a new trilogy, which more recently became a pentalogy. While there is certainly enough fun to be had with this film, the films simply have to get better if they are to standalone from the Harry Potter films.
| 6
|
Dev D is India's answer to sexual-lib: for instance, when Paro rides her bicycle to the fields she makes it a point to carry the mattress along; Chandramukhi attends college during the day and moonlights as a multilingual sex-worker (isn't that the politically correct term these days?); and Devdas, well, he is the same, more or less: a self-centered alcoholic, who romances Paro by asking her to email him her nude photo. For some reason, he fails to gain my sympathy even in this particular adaptation of Sarat Chandra's time classic of a hopeless romantic.
To bring the tale up-to-date, the plot makes liberal use of contemporary controversies: the MMS scandal of a schoolgirl filmed in the act of fellatio and the BMW case, when an industrialist's son drove his BMW over seven unsuspecting roadside sleepers, crushing them to death- both are incorporated into Dev D.
The direction is slick, the songs funny, and the drug-induced sequences, well, they are a direct rip-off from Danny Boyle's Trainspotter. And yes, it could do with a bit more editing.
However, this isn't a film you would want to take your family to, as I learnt to my great embarrassment: both my mother and woman-friend had little choice but to leave the theater post-interval. Their comment: "how sick can it get?"
Just as sick as it really is, I suppose.
| 6
|
Simple and best, must watch.
All characters were really looking real. Direction, story, cinematography and story all are very good.
I like sandeep bhaiya and sk character best.
| 8
|
Dunkirk could be classified as a war movie, an action flick or a suspense thriller depending on who you ask. For me, it's a melange of the three. The tension is palpable, the visuals astounding and the historical details are for the most part accurate. Of course there are some liberties in the factual accuracy department that have been taken.
While gorgeous to behold and offering a score that steals the show so to speak, the emotional core is rather hollow. It's a snapshot of a military disaster, a wartime slice of life as it were, a realistic but impersonal depiction of a major event during WWII. We as the audience experience it as bystanders. You see this event as the people present would have but far removed. We don't know anything about these characters apart from their immediate circumstances. I know it wasn't the point but that is what left me underwhelmed. It was all about survival but without the individual insight. It's a generalized vision of what everyone saw and felt but it takes away the personal experiences.
The film is short, very short for a Nolan film and tries to weave multiple threads and timelines together. An event of this colossal nature cannot be summarized and this film feels like a summary. It's non- stop action and we don't get to experience the psychological turmoil and trauma, the emotional turbulence and deeper character interactions that would have naturally occurred. Sure there are some harrowing scenes of this nature but they are very few. The score is brilliant but manipulative and tricks you into feeling something that you wouldn't otherwise feel. There is no strong protagonist per se, we experience it through the eyes of everyone in the area. It's ambitious but emotionally distant. We zoom from land to sea to sky, the timeline is so squeezed that we don't feel the any of urgency the characters would have felt. Time is the vital factor, a sense of it's moving slowly and the panic that it elicits is absent even though the score features what is essentially a ticking clock. The visuals and cinematography take focus away from the human element. It would have worked much better as a character- driven miniseries in the vein of 'Band of Brothers' or 'The Pacific.'
| 6
|
WARNING: Movie is great, but Coen brothers are liars and lied about truthiness of.this movie. I feel bad and don't like to be lied to. From now on I'll call them Conman brothers
| 1
|
This movie is one of the best cinema productions in which engineering and planning can be seen in all its elements.
Of course, I believe that this film should not be ranked first, but I respect the votes of others and accept it as the first film of this list.
The moment of liberation is well depicted in this film and it controls the audience well.
I also wish to make such a film one day that will excite the audience along with it.
I saw this movie twice, but I liked the first time more than the second time. Some movies are such that you only have to see them once and be thrilled and excited.
This movie is the best, but it doesn't deserve to be the best.
| 5
|
I am a big fan of most of Marvel productions and Daredevil is no exception who doesn't love a superhero I have watched all the series and none have disappointed full of great action good storylines and top acting long may it continue
| 9
|
The writing of the film feels extremely lazy.
The first 20mins of the film introduced some really fascinating elements, but only one (kinetic energy absorbing thingy) was still used at the end.
A lot of things are unexplained and exaggerated so much so that it just feels total BS. Apart from few characters the acting is just bad. Also there are a lot of racial stereotypes which seemed very offensive.
One of the worst marvel movies I have ever watched.
| 2
|
The television landscape has changed very much in the last 15 years. The amount of big name actors involved, major boosts in production quality, and advancements in modern technology have all attributed to television becoming the dominant force it is today. But it's very easy to forget how far we've come without diving back into some of our old favorites from years prior to the 2002. I remember when TV started to feel "different". Huge shows like Lost, Heroes, and the game- changing force that was 24 brought a new cinematic "large-ness" to our screens. 24 in particular has always felt very film-like in scale and in production value. Here you had a larger than life hero, an incredible cast year after year, top notch writers, fantastic production, and what many still call the gold standard for musical scoring on television. Everything in 24 felt "epic". Its not talked about as much sometimes, but the emotional connection you develop with its characters still to this day seem largely unmatched. I've been an avid television enthusiast for most of my life, and there are some truly great shows out there. The last 15 years has been another golden age for the home viewer in terms of quality. However, I still wait for another show to come out that can fill that void that was left when 24 ended. "Live another day" was extraordinary but only reminded me of what were still missing on TV for that short 12 episodes it was on.
| 10
|
Excellent work by mr anurag basu Actually he is different from other movie creators
He is best man
Excellent movie I appreciate this man.
Love u sir.
| 10
|
Avatar: The Last Airbender is in my top 3 TV shows that I have ever seen. It truly is a masterpiece in all areas. Storytelling, characters, action, comedy, romance, it covers it all and blends it all together so well. People judge the show before they watch it. People think it is some kitty Nickelodeon show, but they are so wrong. Avatar is perfect for any age group. I am 24 and love this show. I even know 30 and 40 year olds that love it. Do not knock is before you watch it. Overall the show is fantastic and a must see. I have watched it all the way through three times and plan to do it again sometime in the future. Please watch, I would highly recommend it. 10/10!!!!
| 10
|
I can't believe I skipped this before! Cons: After Episode 25, the show isn't as good as it was before. Plus the ending is disapointing. Pros: Everything else!
| 7
|
As discerning readers of Andrzej Sapkowski's novels and players of CD Project Red's games will know, The Witcher universe is a rich and sprawling tapestry of interesting characters, deeply emotional plot lines, fantastic creatures and settings, and a uniquely Eastern-Eurpean-flavored take on the fantasy genre. It is an understatement to say that The Witcher-verse is a gold mine for an ambitious live-action show producer.
That also means it takes a special kind of talent to squander this potential in the way Lauren Schmidt Hissrich and her Sapkowski-hating writers managed to do. Following their five easy steps you too can become a failed show-runner, despised by fans across the world!
Step 1: Hire a popular lead actor that is very familiar with the source material. Then promise this actor and all the fans of the source material that you're working on a faithful adaptation of the stories they know and love, all while knowing that you intend to do no such thing. This step is important, because if you don't hype up fans of the original content, they won't be as massively disappointed when you inevitably fail to deliver. It is also important because your lead actor will feel that he has been suckered into a project under false pretenses, and when he tries to correct your flawed writing, you can then accuse him of being toxic towards the women in the workplace (They really did this. To Henry Cavill of all people).
Step 2: Hire writers that actively dislike the source material that your show is based on. This will ensure that your promise of a faithful adaptation cannot possibly be kept. It will also make them more likely to project their own views onto the stories, as required in step 4. (Again, they really did this).
Step 3: Whenever you deviate from the source material, do so in ways that don't add anything new or interesting to the story. Your mantra should be: "Replace the good with the bad". Related to this point, make sure that your deviations are also completely unnessecary - this will help the viewer feel confused about your "contributions" to the story.
Step 4: Shoe-horn as much of your own private politics into the show as possible. People hate being told what to think, so you must do so at every turn. The more your viewers are thinking about real-world politics and current events, the less they're concerned with immersing themselves into the world you're creating. If you can make it really obvious and jarring, they might not even be able to concentrate on the story at all! Win-Win-Win!
Step 5: Never listen to criticism, no matter how well reasoned or constructive it is. When disappointed fans criticize your first season, make sure you have a character breakt he 4th wall in the second season to directly berate and belittle those disappointed fans. When your now thoroughly disaffected lead actor tries to carry the show back on track, stand in his way and make is as difficult as possible for him. This way he will eventually give up and quit.
If you follow these five easy steps, you too can ruin a show, even if you have talented actors, directors, technical staff and tons of money at your disposal!
| 3
|
The last time I had to ask so many questions during a film was during incomprehensible existential timewaster "Tron" (so now you also know roughly how old I am!). Significant exceptions aside, this is the "Tron" of the modern-day blockbuster world. I emerged saying "yeah, well
".
I loved "Batman Begins"; Christian Bale is my favourite Batman; and with this many great actors, it should have been a steal. Michael Caine in particular brings, with his briefest appearance on screen, a wonderful sense of comfort and pathos. But despite all this – despite a general tone suitable to a post-traumatic, mid-recession era – I was left entirely agreeing with a reviewer who described feeling unaccountably "disconnected" from the culture that spawned this film. The breathless adulation that some have heaped on the film has astonished me.
I love dark things: I love film noir; and films of all sorts whose characters who struggle with their souls' messy urgings. But "The Dark Knight" is all dark looks and no urgings. Lots of reviewers have praised the 'dark Gotham' design: huh? It's modern-day New York in low light and with extra night thrown in! How is that brilliant? And the crime wave? You want a truly dark tone, watch "Serpico" or "Blue Collar". To make a really good action film about corruption, everyone – literally everyone – needs to be, or to seem, corrupt. How much more interesting would this film have been if Rachel, Alfred and Lucius Fox were under suspicion, or better still, actually corrupt and working against Batman? Or if Batman were found in his Penthouse by Rachel, curled up naked and whispering mad nothings like a Gotham Howard Hughes? Bale was half asleep, or may as well have been – what a waste of that intense face, his physicality! Ledger was very, very impressive, and this was his film – he would eventually have made the lists of the really great actors if he could have kept from doing rubbish films like "Casanova". The charismatic Maggie Gyllenhaal is a pleasant change but even she can't perform the magic trick of making a meaningful character from an underwritten part. I've seen the Batman back catalogue, but throughout this I kept asking: "so
she knows that Bruce is Batman?" "
so
she loves him but she's marrying someone else?" "
so
.she's known him all his life? Who IS she?" I had no idea that this was the same girl Batman had brushed with in "
Begins", so for me, there was no history, no connection, no tension. Everything got absorbed in the central, overstretched idea of Batman's inner darkness versus the Joker's chaos theory.
Like the vision of purgatory that is Batman's temporary lair while Wayne Manor is being rebuilt, mostly I think this film is about nothing more or less than the state of being bored. Batman is bored of his dual lifestyles. The Joker is bored of playing all by himself, the only intelligent psychopath in Gotham. Harvey is bored of winning his not very interesting games of chance. Glass-and-steel Gotham is 1980s dull; crime, which is money, is boring – so boring that the Joker sets his money on fire. That party Bruce throws for Harvey – come on! – the most boring party on earth; Rachel's "love" triangle is the most boring love triangle ever. Maybe a different style altogether would have helped bring this spin on the story alive, such as comic animation in tune with the TV series, or hyper-stylised like "Sin City", which seems apt.
It's absurd to imagine that this film – mere dark-toned spun sugar confection that it is – merits a place in any generation's top 100 list. Here's a revolutionary idea: how about NO more Batman, in this guise at least? Leave the superheroics in the capable hands of Iron Man and Hellboy and move on.
| 5
|
OK, I just watched Dev. D and was really, truly disappointed. Which is still totally fine, you don't have to like every movie out there. But the more disappointing part is I came back and read reviews and so far only found good ones. But then I noticed something. All the reviews were saying how different it is from the typical Bollywood movie. No review said why they truly enjoyed the film. So yes, if your going to talk about it being different from Bollywood movies then yes, it was a great movie. But as a movie by itself, then no.
So many movies are different from typical Bollywood that 'different' should stop being taken into consideration as the only good aspect of the movie. A movie shouldn't be judged and given good ratings just because its not the usual Shahrukh movie. India has been making different movies right from the good old black and white days of the Apu Trilogy. Here is a short list of some other good 'different' films - Everyone says I'm fine, No Smoking, Missed Call, Hyderabad Blues and many more.
So coming back to Dev.D, as a stand alone movie was it good? Not at all. As an experiment or something different from Bollywood? Sure. And here are my reasons:
The characters didn't ever show any emotional connection, which in turn left the viewer never being able to feel for the character, specially for Dev. I probably felt a little for Chanda. But that's it. Dev really didn't have that much going on in his life to be so upset that he had to go out and get wasted or high every night. His love for Paro was never so strong to begin with. He came back to India just to get laid. This was very clearly depicted in the film. And even after meeting Paro he just wanted to get laid. So his whole 2 hours that followed felt like a waste of the two hours coz it never felt like he wanted to that bad to begin with! The whole confusion between Paro and Dev about her sleeping around with many people was such a childlike fight because really, how hard would it have been for them to figure out the truth, all they needed to do was have a 5 minute talk. Anurag, come on. You should know better. And the music. I usually always remember the score after a film. Except for the way it was shot and lit everything else was poor.
Being a friend of Anurag I was extra disappointed because I had such high expectations for the film.
I read the other review on IMDb and it was quite evident that the writer, like many people in India are right now, was just infatuated by Kashyap and will take anything to fill the hole in them that Bollywood has created, but in the process will forget how good a movie really is. Therefore its important to watch movies from all around the world, because sure, if you only watch Bollywood then this movie will surely blow you away.
| 3
|
There is a Hindi version of this film "Aasiqui 2" which is relatively more Interesting! Lady gaga did very well considering it was her first film but I don't find anything so special about this film
| 4
|
What especially impressed me was the uniformly excellent acting of the children - really very impressive.
I always think "tone" is one of the most important qualities a movie needs to possess - it needs to be coherent, well-thought out & consistent. "Stranger Things" has a very particular tone - the '80's feel, the homage to horror/sci fi/fantasy traditions - that is perfectly realized. It manages to be referential & "cliched" while still seeming fresh & original - a very clever trick. Congratulations to the Duffer Brothers!
| 9
|
This is one of the greatest and most crafted works of the incredible Mani Ratnam. I was stunned by every moment of it and the very first scene was enough for me to get completely hooked. Mr Ratnam's ability to make a grandiose love story and yet keep it starkly realistic is just unbelievable. It makes the viewer believe that true, intense love does not exist only in fairy tales, but in real-life too, with simple and ordinary people. Dil Se is a rare gem of its times - authentic, hard-hitting, gripping, and deeply involving. Some people have deemed it a bit slow and tedious, but according to me the film moves at a steady pace and is totally focused, engaging and captivating.
The film's concept: a young, hard-working radio broadcaster falls in love with a mysterious, strangely apathetic woman who is actually a terrorist may have been tackled before by filmmakers around the world, but none has done it the way Mr Ratnam did. He directs this feature with heart and soul and intensifies it with complete mastery, so much that you cannot leave the screen even for one moment (even if you are one of those who prefer skipping the songs). The script is grounded in tension and mystery, and it thankfully avoids sentimentality. And then we also have some genuinely real yet exceptional dialogues, which bring forth a poetic quality that eases the serious proceedings.
Every artist involved in this film gives one of their best. A.R Rahman, for one, creates one of the most crafted and beautiful movie soundtracks of his career, giving so much life and essence to the film. The songs flow incredibly well with the film, they never feel unnecessary, they fit the situations, and ultimately enhance the narrative and contribute to the film's mystery and intense atmosphere. "Dil Se Re", "Jiya Jale", "Chaiyya Chaiyya" and "Satrangi Re" - each track is a gem and showcases the greatness of Rahman and Ratnam, who visualises them exceedingly well on-screen. This of course could have been done without Santosh Sivan's brilliant cinematography.
The performances are top notch. This is one of Shahrukh Khan's most accomplished and realistic performances. He is intense, witty, vulnerable, believable and convincing as Amar. He portrays a suffering man who would go to any strengths for a woman he hardly knows, and though his character's unconditional love may seem peculiar, he manages to keep it real and balanced. He conveys his feelings, whether it's sorrow, love, pain or anger, in his own inimitable style, using his troubling intensity and nervous mannerisms. One can really feel for the pain in his eyes, which is evident every time he meets this woman who keeps rejecting him. A superb act.
Manisha Koirala, one of the most talented dramatic actresses India has seen, is flawless as Meghna. She smiles barely once in the entire film but her expressive eyes and silence speak volumes and always do the job. It's a natural and ambiguous portrayal of a woman who has lost belief in life and love, or at least of someone who compels herself to think so. She brilliantly displays the little nuances which let us sense her constant fights with herself and her struggle to not submit to her feelings every time she faces the bright side of the world, forcefully and firmly fossilising herself for the sake of a mission which must be completed.
Preity Zinta, the star herself in her debut film, does something very few actors have been capable of doing: she makes a great impact despite having a very small role. It's a great achievement for any actor to excel and make a lasting impression with a role of such minimal importance and screen time. She is natural, vibrant and very likable, commanding the audience's attention with her strong screen presence and lively persona. She's always been known for her ability to add happiness and positivity to films which are overly serious and dark, and this one is no exception. Her full of life, frank and direct Preeti is one of the most unforgettable characters in recent years.
Dil Se is a socially relevant movie but it is a love story at heart and there it scores the most. It may not appeal to all kinds of audiences (in fact, it was a box office failure in India, though a success overseas), more because of its brutally honest depiction of terror and national battle, yet it remains thoroughly fascinating. The film is atmospheric, dark and deep. The only aspects that abstract the viewer from these features may be the energetic music and Preity Zinta's light character. In anyway, it is a picture of great artistic excellence, and I would recommend anyone to see it. The ending is also most unpredictable, only making it more beautiful and memorable.
| 9
|
It's definitely not a budget issue. Acting is O.K. but sometimes I have the feeling they are trying tok much. Especially the facial expressions.
CGI is quite good, but the cutting and arrangement of the scenes is horrible. Really awful. As if it was done by amateurs who don't understand that a movie can die at each step of the production.
| 3
|
The show is fun, has stunning visuals and you even learn important lesson on the way.
| 8
|
It is filled with stupid, senseless murder. Superheroes who die from little harms. A psychopath who wants imaginary children like puppies to play with. Regrettably. I really liked Dr. Strange, I was looking forward to this movie. Upset. There was none of the superhero personality, storyline, content here. The main character, who is not given special importance and who tries to somehow stay in the frame. It's not a movie about Dr. Strange, but about the crazy Wanda. I really hope that we will be able to expect a really good sequel, similar to the first film - meaningful, exciting and encouraging to create another sequel.
| 3
|
...this is what 'Matrix' on steroids? I didn't finish watching this overrated pile of nonsense as the 'soap opera' subplot made what ever ending was planned impossible to care about.
Never ending 'staccato' of guns shooting in: Tibet, Paris, Los Angeles (passing for NYC), in cars, out of cars, in buildings - on and on.
Worse was the wife of DiCapprio - if one is going to write a story make it engaging.
I have to say the more I 'see' 'heavies' assaulting the public through brawls, shootings, threats - the more it looks like a short career choice based on declining ability and brains. True actors actresses understand the ubiquitous chase scenes and shoot em' ups are filler because a script can't be coherently portrayed. I lost interest after one hour and pulled the disc before hour two was about to begin.
| 2
|
How this has a good review? It's painful to watch it...nothing like a real Marvel... So disappointed.
| 1
|
The trailer made this look like one of those desperate high-concept made for TV movies, or a bad reunion show. But it's fantastic. A tight, topical and insightful script - both comic and melancholic, bringing to mind Planes, Trains and Automobiles. Beautiful locations and cinematography. All the technicals are top notch, as is the casting and acting. Nothing about the show feels dated or out of touch.
The chemistry between Martin and Short is something to behold, so much so that "Martin and Short" might as well be admitted to the pantheon of "Martin & Lewis", etc. And it's great to see the singular Martin Short in a major role again.
Actually that's not true: it ought to be "Martin & Short & Gomez". I was baffled to see her name in the cast (I've not seen much of her work) but she not only fits in perfectly with Martin and Short, but I think her stoic, hard and (sort of) sweetness balances the combination of the two other leads (a mix akin to Kirk, Spock and McCoy.). Nothing about her presence seems obligatory. A great bit of casting, and the show wouldn't work without her.
Looking forward to season 7.
| 10
|
Boring, no where going story. You expect something to happen but it stays at teasing. Pointles movie to be honest.
| 5
|
A terrible series. BORING and dull.
Stick with the original documentary. It is fantastic and REAL.
The real documentary tells the entire, horrifying story. You will be riveted to your seat!
| 1
|
Let me say right off the bat that it absolutely makes sense to me that "Devs" will likely end up being a fairly polarizing piece of art. The reason for this is that the show is taking a very, very slow and mysterious approach to unfolding the story. There is not much explanation for anything so far, a lot of it is left up to the viewers imagination and theories, which is great for some, but might be too much to ask of of others. I personally find myself in the first category of viewers.
This is a very cerebral and smart show, but it is also incredibly weird and, again, slow. There seems to be a lot of inspiration drawn from David Lynch's and Nicholas Winding Refn's work, which is awesome in my opinion! If either or even both ring a pleasent bell - this show is probably for you! What Alex Garland is doing here is definitely not for the masses, nor is it meant to be. I'm certain he knew that he was creating something for a nieche group of people, which is why it is sort of a miracle that this even got greenlit by FX, but I for one am very happy that it was.
The music is outstanding, with Garland staple Geoff Barrow (of Portishead and Beak> fame) once again throwing his unique electronica into the mix amongst other composers. (Lots of Ambient with crazy but satisfying saxophone sounds... rad!) The cinematography is fantastic as usual and the acting and writing are great for the most part - with some disappointing but excusable hickups here and there.
I also love that Garland seems to be the primary writer and director for all the episodes, which is increasingly more important as the blurring of lines between tv and movies continues. (This is why the masterful first season of "True Detective" or the criminally underrated Netflix gem "Maniac" were so perfect - they had one primary writer and one primary director working in order to deliver a consistent experience throughout.)
Overall I would highly recommend "Devs" to anyone that likes odd and thought-provoking entertainment.
| 8
|
Impressive actors but unimpressive performances. Oh come on.... It wasn't that bad. It was poorly written, unimpressive directing and cinematography with a lot of plot holes an non-sense things but it was entertaining. Except Isla Fisher, who was very bad, the acting was ok. It is not a mediocre thriller, it was a little better than that.
| 6
|
From my side it deserve 10 star but I have it 7 cos: okay first of all it has a slow start and it will make u feel why u r here but hold it lad there cos yes really it has a good story u need to be patient 2ndly that really annoyed me, no. Of character and names is really confusing and there pet name that really had me search again n again.
Many of all here saying that main character is crying baby and suppose to be strong but they have shown a introvert character and not courageous character, i really can connect to the character cos he is emotional and yes week too but giving best shot makes u strong even not being strong I really suggest u to watch this cos yes this one really a boom anime though with a slow start but when things get start on August 3 after that u really gonna love it I specially downloaded imdb app just to rate this anime cos yes it's really deserve one time watch So don't leave in start be patient fella😇
| 4
|
...that includes the visual richness, the mocap quality, the action sequences and also the idiotic plot, the cringey pandering, the plot holes and loose, crass world building. Considering the god awful source material and considering Spielberg directed it, the film couldn't be much better. But it's very much a polished turd. If it wasn't for the intermittent visual splendour and perfect facial capture, this would be a terrible film.
| 6
|
Stranger things season finale: I confirm my previous review. Pacing is all over the place, characters all over the place, tone all over the place, storylines all over the place.
Many looong expositions that water down the narrative and the action, cartoonish characters (surfer dude and russian smuggler) that are even more irritating and unfunny than Jar Jar Binks, and even the characters that are not cartoonish often have inappropriate jokes or tone for a life or death situation.
The Russia storyline has no connection with the main narrative, and the show wants to be too many things simultaniusly but you can't be both a light-hearted Goonies-style comedy and a dark apocalyptic horror at the same time cause those two tones are gonna spoil each other (unless you're Ivan Reitman directing Ghostbusters, but the Duffer brothers are no Reitman).
Plus some protagonists became totally useless and plainly unsufferable, with their 1 teen-angst expression throughtout the whole season turning their entire screen time into a snooze fest (hello Will).
Bottom line: this show had one season to go for and that was brilliant. Anything after that is just beating a dead horse and it becomes more apparent season after season, which in view of the upcoming season 5 fills me with dread and frustration.
| 5
|
I always thought Dick van Dykes Cockney accent in Mary Poppins was bad. But its been relegated into 2nd place by Daniel Craigs american accent. Truly awful. And the film overall wasn't much better. It seemed to be confused as to its genre. Is it a detective? Is it a comedy? All a bit "Carry On" blended with "Murder on the Orient Express" for my taste. Perhaps they need to sit down and decide what exactly the film is. It's a half decent cast, with some interesting characters, but they must be sadly disappointed at how their talent has been squandered by the director and producer. Any recommendations for a decent film?
| 3
|
The movie is missing its own story. There is no strong plot but definitely action is good not the best.
| 4
|
I think this could be a textbook example on how not to do a sequel. Season 1 was an amazing season. It was very similar to the original book, which is well written and very funny. Season 2 does not come from a book. It's a very different story using the original two characters. The take and acting for Gabriel (Jon Hamm) are indeed the best part of season 2. The characters of Aziraphale and Crowly are nothing compared to season 1. The acting from Sheen and Tennant is not as good, probably because the writers did a terrible job with these characters. A very big disappointment. The choices that the characters make don't really make any sense, they seem simply arbitrary, with no care of what the characters did in season 1. Maybe Amazon had to hired writers out of high-school as the professional ones were already on strike?
| 5
|
This series clearly better than previous mcu series. But not perfect. First 4 episodes were little bit boring. Most of the the time we saw just talking. Loki and mobius, loki and silviy. But last 2 episodes are the best part. I give this series a 8 because of last 2 episodes. Otherwise this series deserve only 6.5.
| 8
|
Easily Francis Ford Coppola's 2nd best movie (OK maybe rivaled for that honor by "The Conversation") and #1 IS NOT the Godfather. "Apocalypse Now" forever of course. BUT Godfather II delivers on all the promises made by part one and then some. The film offers standout performances. sumptuous sets that span almost a century and two continents. The sweep of the story is fantastical the acting is in depth the structure a balanced homage to the principles of part one but far more polished. Get with the program. sure, part one is a great action movie, but this is pure cinema gold.
| 10
|
Basically, a waste of time and an insult to my intelligence. One star for being in color, a second star for all the great looking girls, okay a third star for Leonardo, but offset this by a negative star for glamorizing drug addition and irresponsible wealth (yes it did!). I expect a movie to either entertain me or emotionally move me. This did neither. I know the drug usage and corruption for the sake of money was meant to be revolting, but instead it came across as being painted as desirable. Sorry to see such talent wasted on this. I'm guessing the book/script must have had more appeal than actually seeing this as a film.
| 2
|
Why do the makers of films have to have smoking in these types of films? Smoking is stupid and kills people. Who cares if most people in the Soviet Union smoke. Why perpetuate a bad habit! Great mini series except for the smoking and killing of animals.
| 9
|
This movie is the best I have so far seen from the Bollywood (I have seen more than 800 films). I just cannot describe the movie. It is just perfect. Each and every scene, each and every dialog looked perfect. The music, one of the most memorable and the story, just excellent. I have watched the movie more than ten times and so far I have not found even a single mistake or some thing like that which could be said improper. Even the last action scene was so perfect that I have very rarely seen such proper directed scenes. If you have not watched the movie, just watch it now. But remember one thing. There should be complete pin drop silence in the room and no body should talk until the end of the movie.
| 10
|
Uniquely captures your binge needs and leaves you wanting more and the tune for the end credits of the last episode was perfect 🤘🏻🤘🏻🤘🏻🤘🏻
| 8
|
This is what we've been waiting for so long! OMG, this episode had the info required since chapter one!! So many emotions right now.
| 10
|
A film that gives fear and tension. Although the script is simple, the subject does not disrupt the integrity. It shows a successful production with increasing tension. The music and the scenes using the music are really good. The acting performances are absolutely satisfying. The scenario is simple and cliché but the tension and jumpscare parts are very in place.
⭐ 100/62
| 6
|
A grating example of how modern filmmaking has utterly lost the ability to tell a story. They've got the budget. The actors. The locations. The camerawork. The sound. And after nearly two hours, there is no coherent sense of storytelling in any direction, emphasized all the more by that relentless, anachronistic musical score... We can only pray the 'slice of life' era of filmmaking will end soon. I'm exhausted from so-called auteurs forcing audiences to do the work they themselves haven't done.
| 3
|
Amazing that group of people all sat around and said "yea this is fine. Release the movie."
| 2
|
Like a faded memory of Casino and Goodfellas, The Irishman covers the same ground in a similar vein (longer and slower) and doesn't add anything new. There are some entertaining exchanges and lines, some interesting scenes and moments, visuals and editing, but half-way through, the film becomes really boring and repetitive. If you've seen your Coppola and Scorsese mafia flicks before, you've seen it all. Yes, the CGI doesn't really work, but that's not even the main issue with the film. The exploration of loyalty, friendship, family, etc. has been done in so many of these films - I kept thinking about the scene between De Niro and Ray Liotta in the diner and Liotta's Voice Over in Goodfellas, which basically sums it all up. In the end I was utterly exhausted by the Irishman's overlong resolution and denouement, which again, didn't add anything new or noteworthy to the genre.
| 5
|
We are looking in a life of a Russian female SPY. Curly, Brutal it is bound to be. Very atractive beautiful charming used in espionage getting Cold War countries missions assignments. A step little out side the trek results in betrayal and punishment very heavy tortured death. Maneuvering chances, getting favors, friendly relationships in opposite camp, Jennifer excels in acting. At time plots are meant to confuse the character viewer is also kept on edge of suspicion. This is definitely Cold Blooded thing in general.
| 7
|
Stranger Things is the best supernatural show out there, it absolutely lives up to the hype. The show started off strong with season 1 although the cgi was wonky, the story, writing, acting and everything else were outstanding (a solid 9/10), season 2 was a bit weaker but still amazing (8.5/10), season 3 had a complete different summer vibe (not complaining) and was heavily praised amongst fans, the season started off a bit weak but picked off quickly and got really good with fantastic cgi, leading up to a 10/10 finale (9/10) and finally the star of the show; season 4, my absolute favorite season, the episodes get longer (around 1h 15m episodes and a 2h 20m finale), although the first 2 episodes were slow, the show picked up quickly and we got mind blowing episodes leading up to the extraordinary finale where it exceeded all my expectations. (10/10)
| 9
|
I saw three seasons of this show. There were some good, but mostly bad. I get the impression that there are different writers and different directors. When you speak of an miscellany series like Twilight Zone then, well I expect to see that. The show left me wanting. Albeit the context was supposed to be sci-fi fantasy related I've seen much better on ordinary TV. If you are bored then you can watch them but you will probably fast forward or skip entire episodes after the first few minutes. The majority of the cast are almost unknowns but with some good writing it did okay. Season 1 episode 1 I enjoyed the most. After that the rest of the season left a dull taste in my mouth.
| 5
|
I was very much looking forward to this film but it disappoints in just about every way. The acting is horrible, characters are uninteresting, and some of the battle scenes are so hoaky I think I could film them myself with some buddies. The acting lets you know right away that it is "acting," unlike in a quality film that sucks you in, mesmerizes you, and you feel like it's real. Not at all the case here. Very amateur and a waste of time. I want my 1:30 back!!!
| 2
|
For a while my friends have been telling me to watch this show but I never saw the appeal. However, after watching the first season, I binged the entire show in a matter of 2 weeks. What I can say is that this show offers a similar comradery that we see in shows like "Friends". Community focuses on the dynamics between the characters in the Study group, focusing on how the group initially starts out as a legitimate study group, but morphs into a group of chaotic and funny friends, whom affect one another in many ways. The show is very quirky and different, yet has a sense of familiarity to it. That is thanks to the many homages paid to very famous and loved movies such as "Lord of the Rings", "Star Wars", "The Shawshank Redemption" and many many more. All of the characters have a lot to offer with their quirkiness and differences, adding new layers of flavor and comedy to the group. Additionally, every season had an animated episode (Sort of like that sequence in the 3rd Harold and Kumar movie where it went all animated) that I thought distinguished this show from many others, it was definitely an interesting decision, and one that I believed payed off . All in all, I think if you're a fan of shows like "Friends" or "Parks and Rec" then this show is a must watch.
Six Seasons and Movie!
| 8
|
It was an amazing and action packed film with a lot of screaming and loud noises it was a little creepy but fun and with romance.
The main thing about the movie is relationship but it focuses more on venom and eddies relationship.
The post credits scene is going to shock everybody and is so good I recommend venom let there be carnage for you to watch.
| 10
|
I want to start off by saying that this movie was wonderfully produced. Everything from a technical standpoint of filming is sensational here- the soundtrack, the cinematography, and the acting. There is a really great scene between DiCaprio and a little girl that made me laugh out loud. Brad Pitt kinda just makes the same face the whole movie, and Margot Robbie has so little to do in this film. That being said, they both kill it when they are on screen and the chemistry between DiCaprio and Pitt is phenomenal. The last fifteen minutes really showcase this duo's talents.
In my opinion, the biggest problem with this movie is that it is really boring at times. Nothing really happens in the first 2 hours of this film, and Sharon Tate has absolutely no role in the plot. It seems to me that this movie was intended to be a tribute to the 60s, and nothing further than that. I will probably never see this movie again.
| 6
|
Off late MCU movies are getting incredibly complex with plots that need advanced degrees in astrophysics to understand . They need to understand that most folks are just looking for 2 hours of enjoyment. Keep the plots simple will ya going forwards?
| 3
|
The Lion King 2019 is the live-acion remake of the 1994 animated movie of the same name. It is directed by Jon Favreau, who brought us The Jungle Book in 2016, goode start so far. This movie tells the tale of a young lion named SImba who is destined to be king after his father Mufasa, and the journey he goes through to become king in the process.
I'm gonna be upfront, tis movie is a prime example of pointless. It doesn't need to exist at all and I have my reasons for saying that. For starters, the plot is a total rehash of the original animated film. Nothing of substance has been added to the film, and the stuff that is new is just useless padding. They didn't try to add in anything that could propel the film, I mean I'd be happy if we got some character depth from Scar. If you've seen the original Lion King, you've basically know what happens in this movie. Heck, there are several instances where lines from the script have been totally copy-and-pasted from the original movie. Second, all throughout watching this, I kept asking myself "Why was this re-made in live-action?". I asked this because remaking a movie who's only characters are animals is totally unnecessary. In order to add the animals in, they'd need to utilize CGI or train them. This movie is just CGI animals plastered on live-action backgrounds, and the CGI characters are expressionless. It was necessary for the original Lion King to be animated in order to showcase the characters' body language and facial expression properly, it works in that movie as they have the power to move people 25 years later. With this movie, I couldn't feel any emotion because you can't see it in their faces. The movie wants to focus on being realistic all-around that it doesn't think outside the box with the CGI.
Are there any good qualities that this movie has? Well, yes, it has some good to it. I think that the shots of the movie are beautiful looking, and I thought that the CGI animators did a good job with animating any animals that weren't the ones that were the main focus. I thought that Hans Zimmer's score was great here, like usual. FInally, I thought that the voice acting was good, mostly. There is some great talent here and I think most of it was used well, such as Seth Rogen as Pumba, and Donald GLover as adult SImba. However, I think some of the other actors could have done a better job with what they were given, such as the voice actor for Scar, where he could've given him a more intimidating voice.
Despite all the talent on display here, The Lion King 2019 fails to be good with its re-hashed story, wasted script and overly-realistic CGI. Sadly, Disney knows that this formula of remaking classics works because it's bringing in cash, and seemingly satisfying audiences. If you hate this decision like I do, then by all means vote with your wallet and don't go see Disney live-action remakes like this.
3/10
| 3
|
Yes, one shot is amazing ( actually more than one ) , but the plotting is too simple, what a big fuss to deliver such a minor assignment!
I like the lighting art at the night time chasing scene , other than that, really boring !
| 2
|
The cast selection throughout the series was amazing. This series was great to watch. Viewers would something by watching this series. This series had so much to reveal about the true nature of what life is really made of. Viewers watch the reality of every possibility. The storyline throughout the whole series was enjoyable. There were some parts within the series that the crew could have been created better. I was not a fan of some particular parts. The cast really committed to this series and to their respective characters. This is fun and great series for everyone to watch and learn something about life.
| 6
|
Iron Man 2 is a good film. It has two dymanic, beautiful leads at the top of their game. Is has a mean looking, potentially threatening bad guy. It has smart, shiny, clever technology and mercifully, at 124 mins, isn't too long. These are all good qualities and add up to a solid piece of cinematic entertainment.
It is a sequel, and a piece of a greater story, so does it stand alongside it's predecessor. Not particularly well, sadly. It lacks the freshness and revelatory qualities of the original and doesn't provide anything new. This time Iron Man is confronted with more Iron Men. So I guess it's just, literally, more of the same. The relationship between Stark and buddy Rhodes is rehashes rather than built upon, likewise with loyal confidante and friend Pepper Potts, where there is a clearly a spark, but adds no more than a kiss toward the end - an easy cop-out.
Where it's greatest failure lies, is that there isn't really any excitement. The bad guy, Mickey Rourke, confronts Stark/Iron Man during a sensational, thrilling action set-piece in Monaco (with a very cool weapon, by the way), but then virtually disappears for the entire second act, while the less effective (though highly entertaining) "other" bad guy, Hammer takes over. There is no tension building and no real threat to Iron Man (other than a serious butt-kicking). The hero never really seems in any real danger - even when he faces death fron his own life-saving chest thing, he simply invents a new one and the problem is solved.
So, how does it rate overall. A good film, entertaining, clever... better than your average hero movie, but not up with the best. By the time
| 6
|
They don't care about reality. So much cliches. It's still cold gray soviet country for a movie, still balet, kgb agents and fur hats everywhere. So much pointless nudity and violence. I'm really disappointed that Jennifer Lawrence takes part in that trash. It's my first review for imdb, didn't care much before. But i have never been so embarassed by a movie for a long time. Pure propaganda, don't waste your time.
| 2
|
Whole movie was targeted only for one mission ? Must watch to first one to forget this one. Was too much madness of multiuniverse. Story could be much better.
| 3
|
Whilst amusing at times, I was left worried about how this would be viewed by Jewish people and descendants. I felt at times that it made light of a hideous part of history and horror that so many experienced. Maybe I may not have judged it quite as harshly if it was made by a Jewish descendent rather than a New Zealander.
| 7
|
I normally enjoy movies, but this movie was so poorly put together that I had to make comments about it.
The storyline and its extremely poor scientific basis of portrayal is perhaps the worst I have ever seen in a science fiction movie. It seems the whole point to the story is to wow the audience with special effects. If this was the Director's purpose, he's succeeded. However, a motion picture should have a believable story that ties together to the end. This movie did not even come close to achieving that.
What a waste of time and money....Were there really any scientific advisers to the film crew??? Apparently not...
| 1
|
More emotionally charged than the first Avengers movie and even better than the Russo Brother's last movie Winter Soldier (2014), Civil War is my new favourite MCU movie. Both action packed and full of powerful game changing moments that shake the status quo, this film makes sure the once solid superhero team will never be the same again.
The performances are across the board excellent, especially newcomer Tom Holland as Spider-Man. Even Robert Downey Jr, six movies in, gives his best performance as Tony Stark. Civil War does everything that Batman v Superman tried to do, combining great action scenes, and making you care about the characters. Best movie in the MCU, maybe best comic book movie ever?
| 8
|
One of the three best in the series!! If we take infinity war and endgame as one. Ages of alteon is the second and then comes civil war. Don't know why it's under 8. Thi final fight is great. Mass fight wasn't as good as it's wanted to be, but you still enjoy watching them beating each other... lots of marvel jokes, great job as always. It's 9 for me, but I give ten to raise ratings
| 10
|
Ooooft. Where to start?
I went in knowing nothing as I deliberately avoided reviews and additional trailers. I wanted this to be a pure experience as I thought 'Spielberg and John Williams?! Of course this will be a memorable cinematic experience!"
Sadly wrong.
The first hour was so dull, we nearly left the cinema! I've never done that before. It perked up mid-way, and I thought we were going to get into some highs or lows. But not really.
The pace of the movie was consistent. But it was horribly dull and I just couldn't connect with any of the characters. The actor playing 'Sam' was very good, and I'm sure he will have a great career.
But this is a solid fail for me.
| 4
|
Visuals: 10 out of 10 Story: 1 out of 10 Acting: 2 out of 10 Dialogue: 0 out of 10
I do not care about how much effort went into this movie or how everyone talks about the ground breaking CGI. Why do we need films like Avatar? It is dull, long and boring.
When it comes to a real deep cinematic experience we need more than just CGI. What about the story? What about the acting? What about the dialogue? Avatar 2 displays what in my opinion is wrong about film making today: all focus and money goes into CGI - all other important areas are neglected. I want to see Sigourney Weaver in real life and not as a blue animated teenage creature. It makes me sad in which direction the movie industry is heading.
That is why Avatar 2 is as good as Sharknado - just with a 350 Million budget.
Greetings from Vienna.
| 3
|
My God, how the Hell can any anyone give this movie anything above 1 star let alone Oscars. This has to be the most hyped up, BS, dribble drooling, crap I've ever seen. People and critics alike are stating it's the best thing that ever happened since sliced bread...really?
12 years as a Slave is over melodramatic, lacking historical context and quite simply boring as hell. This movie lacked soul and plays on the heart string of anyone who ever was a sucker for such BS dribble.
It's not the actors fault this movie sucked. It had exceptional actors: Michael Fassbender,Benedict Cumberbatch , Paul Giamatti and Brad Pitt. A stellar line up expect for Lupita Nyong'o AND SHE WON THE Oscar FOR HER PERFORMANCE. She was the weakest of the cast and her acting was over dramatic to the point of nausea. Truly I dare you to compare the scene where she is being punished with the whip to Denzel Washington's performance in Glory (1989) and seriously think who truly deserved that golden midget statue?
Chiwetel Ejiofor, as Solomon is mis-casted as the lead. His character really doesn't develop much, which is the reason the audience don't fully engage with him. Sure we follow his journey and feel sympathy but along the way you realise Solomon is a douchbag. He is suppose to be intelligent, articulate and..well...smart. Come on dude! where's the personality. Seriously, it that does not translate at all through the screen. I reckon the book is better on character development and empathy.
The editing and pacing was choppy that it makes you want to pull your hair out. It was all over the place and it is very noticeable in the beginning of the movie. The first and second act were slow but the haste to put the main actor in the south was rushed, and so was the ending.
And the costume, what the heck? 36 minutes into the film and you realise he's the only slave in the bayou wearing knee high boots? Say what???
I'm not even gonna bother with Steve McQueen as a director...he is really not worth the effort. What is truly bothersome is scenes are left hanging and there is no follow up, or any explanation of what is going on and why. Where's the back story to the main characters & supporting characters? Where's the humour to add lightness and texture to the movie up after a heavy sombre screen (the beatings) like in The Color Purple (1985) or the interaction of the supporting characters.
The script was the only thing that made sense but the execution of the story was poorly done. When you think about it you've seen the story line before with a sadistic boss and a slave:- put Lupita Nyong'o as a slave Jewish maid and Michael Fassbender's character in a Nazi uniform and in WWII. Wham!! same relationship scenario in Schindlers List with Amon Goeth (Ralph Fiennes) and Helen (Embeth Davidtz) only better direction of their relationship and the dynamics of it.
If anyone wants to see a film about the human spirit and triumph over evil view Schindler's List (1993).
For those you are interested in a the plight of the slaves in America see Roots (1977). It might be dated but it's better that the sordid mess called 12 Years as a Slave.
| 1
|
I didn't see anything special about this movie. It wasn't unique, mind provoking, mind blowing or anything special. I feel I've seen several similar movies in the past. I think if you keep everything the same except for the language, setting and subtitles (American made) then this movie would have been just another, 'it was okay', movie.
| 5
|
In my Facebook Group Movie For Mother they recommend the boringest, most boring crummy dumb moveys that they ever did make!
Citizen Kane? More like Shitizine Kane! Vertigo? More like the movie was so boring it make me so Boredigo.
So finally, they recommend this movie, it were call the God Father and they sayed it was going to be the gangster movie, I did not see Twopack or 50 Cents in the cover of the movie but I did see Scarface Pacino I know that not his real name but it wasn't the right Scarface actor because in this movie he did not start to turn into looking like a turkey!
Anyways I turn on this movie when I put Stephanie into her crib, and it was so boring that I was sooooo bored the hole time.
I know Mexicans are violent, but the Mexicans they show in this movie just look so bad and so violent that it was scary and boring, and I'm very offended that they recommend that I watch such a offensive boring slow movie where nothing happens the whole time, I wish that they make us watch more of the best movies like click by Adam Sandler or species.
| 2
|
Yes, I have an inner science editor, and I turned the show off after less than 5 minutes. Oops, showing my age, who turns a show off any more? As the ship is crashing, the computer voice is calling the current altitude in feet, which matches the computer display, except in meters rather than feet. And what's with all the unsecured stuff and one thing gets the mom's leg stuck?
Nope, if I keep watching this show it is just going to drive me crazy with bad science and missed details.
| 1
|
DON'T TRUST THE EPIC REVIEWS!! Waste of time and energy to keep you awake in this pointless, tiring, meaningless bad production, zero script, annoying lead character who is yelling and swearing all time. ALL BAD! Go ahead and watch it only if you are mentally unstable WITH TWISTED BRAIN and psychological problems. Seriously now, IS THIS REAL THAT ACTUALLY A NORMAL HUMAN BEING CAN LIKE THAT TRASH? Still wondering why did I make the mistake to trust the epic reviews from unstable people apparently. STAY AWAY!!!!!!
| 1
|
The Harry Potter phenomenon has been all around me. I've seen each of the films and made a stab at the first book, but after a few pages, I wasn't interested in reading further. Yet, the spectacle (and considerable hype) surrounding the films has always been a draw. But to say I have any emotional investment (or even curiosity) in the story couldn't be further from the truth.
Action films, particularly those with elaborate CGI content, can keep me interested. Only a few of the Harry Potter films were truly a disappointment, so walking into the "Deadly Hallows," I was only there for the show. My companion, however, had seen none of the previous ones nor was he familiar with the books/story, and from his reaction ("And just where did they get the shovel?") I'd suggest if you don't know anything about Harry Potter, you'll be
lost.
As the actors have aged, each episode has brought a more serious tone. While much of the art direction is self-referenced from the previous films, there's something claustrophobic in "Deadly Hallows." There's a sense of impending doom that is very well-done. In most "chase" films, the characters have a chance to rest or hide and plan their next move. Not here. Danger lurks at every turn and in every shadow. That is very well reflected by the young actors, and the sense of weariness and defeat is somehow beautifully realized by the technical crew. (For instance, a short animated film is used to illustrate a key mystery, and it's stunningly beautiful and frightening as well
like a nightmare Tim Burton would have.) And in fact, this film points towards a deepening realization that evil is not just something in a children's fairy tale, but can take over the world at a moment's notice. And whether the forces of good will be able to win in the battle that's ahead, is a lesson not just for children or adolescents.
| 8
|
So fast-paced and jumping from timeline and places my head almost span. Liked the main actors acting, others meeeehhh dunno.
| 5
|
I had really high hopes for this show... As a black guy... I figured this would be a fair substitute for Chappelle to hold me over till the new season of Boondocks... then I watch it. Basically... every black stereotype imaginable... even ones I had forgotten about, get exploited for a laugh. I see they are trying to make fun of the stereotypes... but they just do it so badly it just reinforces it to me. There is no point to the show... I don't mean a comedy show has to have a serious point... but at least... a funny point... Its hackneyed sketch comedy with some truly unnatural and sad stand up in between. The only thing keeping me from writing a letter to Comedy Central(of which I'd never think of... hell I even liked Chocolate News) is the sincere hope that it gets better. Just my opinion though folks. Update: It got a bit better... they veered off the stereotype kick and just went to everyday issues... so thanks for that... Just seems like they carry their jokes out too far... pretty much every time to the point where if you thought it was funny at first, by the time it ends you are like... sigh... we get the point keep it moving...
| 9
|
Po is now living his dream as The Dragon Warrior, protecting the Valley of Peace alongside his friends and fellow kung fu masters, The Furious Five. But Po's new life of awesomeness is threatened by the emergence of a formidable villain, who plans to use a secret, unstoppable weapon to conquer China and destroy kung fu. Po must look to his past and uncover the secrets of his mysterious origins; only then will he be able to unlock the strength he needs to succeed. -- (C) Dreamworks
KUNG FU PANDA 2 is an example of a sequel that surpasses it's predecessor. Instead of repeating the plot of the first film, the creative minds behind this sequel made the rightful decision to continue expanding Po's emotional story, in this case meaning that we finally find out Po's origin story. By doing this, KUNG FU PANDA 2 feels much more emotionally involving than the first, and it just goes to show you that Dreamworks Animation have matured in the past few years, although PUSS IN BOOTS looks like it'll bring the studio back a few steps.
With that being said, the film does suffer from having too many things going on at once, as if afraid that it'll bore the kids in the audience. The film moves at an lightening speed and, before you know it, the credits are rolling right in front of you. Part of this is due to the film's amazing narrative economy. For example, in the first few minutes, we have already learned the villain's origin story told in a fairytale kind of way with Michelle Yeoh as the narrator, à la THE MUMMY: TOMB OF THE DRAGON EMPEROR. I just wished the film took its time in certain parts because the film could have certainly been better if we had time to breathe.
As with most sequels, everything is bigger in KUNG FU PANDA 2. This includes the action sequences, which are amazing, stunning, and wildly imaginative, all enhanced by the 3D technology and the gorgeous cinematography. The 3D also provides amazing depth in almost every scene and moments of pop out gimmicks. With a bigger scope and the ability of animators to manipulate everything on screen, the extra dimension is certainly worth the extra cost. Hans Zimmer's score is terrific as usual, continuing the theme from the first film.
I also liked the villain a lot, the peacock Shen, voiced by the great Gary Oldman. The character is fleshed out more than your usual 2D villain, and he was pretty bad ass. Jack Black continues to prove that he's a great voice actor and provides the charm of the film with the lovable Po. His relationship with Angelina Jolie's Tigress is explored further in here as well, and it'll be interesting to see where they'll end up in the next sequel. I also liked the addition of Michelle Yeoh, who's pretty much great in everything she's in.
The wicked fast pace doesn't ruin the film, but slowing it down could have made it better. While not an amazing sequel, KUNG FU PANDA 2 is still better than the first film. With a great visual sense of wonder, funny jokes, and fantastic action sequences, this is an entertaining and emotionally involving sequel that branches out the story from the first film. In 2D or 3D, do yourself a favor and just go watch it. 7.5/10
| 8
|
They've written a young adult show akin to many many others.
It was likely say around on a shelf for a few years, deciding whether to make it a season of Sabrina or Winx or some other such young adult.nonsense that Netflix pump out quicker than Cadburys pumps out chocolate.
Someone probably watched the Addams cartoon movie and remembered the unused plotlines of the unused draft script they had in the shelf. Easily changed one character to Wednesday, put it into production
The proof of this is that you could pretty.mich take Wednesday out, put in Sabrina, or a Human that's just found out they have visions, or a Human that's just discovered they have magic, or a Human that's just found out they're a Vampire etc etc etc. It'd be more or less the same show.
But, for all that and all the similarities to Winx and Sabrina, it's still an okay show and it's well cast and well played by all. It's fine.
I don't know why there seems to be an over abundance of 10/10 ratings though. It's clichéd and predictable and doesn't deserve to be hailed as Perfection.
7/10 is the score it warrants.
Above average, even good, but not perfect.
| 7
|
Underwhelming movie. Not accurate depiction of the time and the scene where he runs away from enemy fire in the middle of open city is just so phony.
| 2
|
This movie deliberately depicts all people of Iran as retarded wild animals (just like the movie 300). Many Americans who have no real knowledge of the history of Iran are brainwashed by movies like this, so that in case sanctions and and upcoming wars kill millions of Iranians, American people would support their government for even more damage to be done to a nation of animals.
Remember may of the historical events in this movie are not accurate. Please read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ajax#U.S._role to see how UK and Us overthrew Iranian people's democratically elected prime minister Mosaddegh and replaced him with their own selected oppressor Reza Shah to have access to Iranian oil again.
This movie = part of the Brain Washing machine of Hollywood
| 1
|
I was looking forward to watching this series however, I am really underwhelmed by the scrip. Not to mention lack of character development and so many flaws. Acting is average. Nothing gripping. Some good visual effects otherwise has a low budget feel to it. Still worth a watch if you have nothing better to do.
| 6
|
If you enjoy watching over-egged, relentless fight scenes with no real story then this is the film for you and your 2 brain cells. Easy to follow, limited dialogue and the bullets don't seem to kill anyone. Amazing how many times John Wick can fall down 220 plus steps and effortlessly get up and go again. Furthermore, the genius idea of a blind assassin might not be to everyone's taste but it's amazing what you can do these days with a walking stick. Bonus - you can get away with a sleep in the middle and still keep up. The actual storyline (if you can call it that) could have been wrapped up in 5 minutes, but I guess they had a film to make so needed to stretch it out - and boy, did they?!
| 2
|
Great characters and light hearted. However Chevy Chase is 0% funny. Always has been. Always will be.
| 7
|
Do not go by 10/10 or 1/10. Indian idiots are giving it 10/10 because it shows India in a positive light and Bangladeshi Muslims in a negative light. Bangladeshis are giving it 1/10 because it shows Bangladesh in poor light. The problem is most ratings are not based on the artistic quality of the film. I give 5/10 only for the action. Otherwise the film is a total waste of your time. No plot, no characterization, no decent acting, nothing. Just boom effing boom after effing boom.
| 5
|
Wow, what a feast for the eyes, total eye candy. From start to finish this movie does one thing..... ENTERTAIN!!! Stephen Chow brings back the same eye popping effects and cinematography as in Shoalin Soccer, but wraps a story of a mis-guided hood, that becomes saviour to a small block of people against a local gang. This movie has it all from story, characters, action and plot. You can't help feeling... why aren't there more movies like this? The build up during the end of this movie is fantastic. I won't spoil any of this fan for anyone, but I highly recommend this movie if you want something totally out of this world. At the end of this movie you are wanting more. Thank you Stephen Chow for this classic
| 9
|
I got disappointed while watching Dunkirk as it is more or less like a tick-tock version of Saving Private Ryan.
The background score is so much emphasized that you can barely hear the dialogues between the characters. I recall that there was a similar problem in Inception where the old Japanese's dialogue was in a mutely tone. The surprising thing also is that there is any hardly any character development in the script, which many viewers may disagree with me as Nolan has smartly justified in Inception.
If you love war movies, go ahead. But don't indulge yourself much. Because it is the same scenes you have seen before.
My Significant digit score: 5.5/10
| 5
|
Marvel has really outdone themselves with the long-anticipated sequel to Joe Johnston's Captain America origin story, Captain America: The First Avenger (2011). Smartly hiring the creative geniuses of Anthony and Joe Russo based largely on Marvel Executive Director Kevin Feige being impressed with their work on NBC's irreverent comedy "Community", teamed up with excellent story-tellers, Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely, who also wrote the first Cap film as well as Thor: The Dark World (2013), they forged what is arguably one of the best films ever produced.
As Steve Rogers struggles to adjust to living in a modern world following the events of the Battle of New York some two years earlier, his allegiances come into question when it is discovered that S. H. I. E. L. D. may have some dirty secrets of its own, and Director Nick Fury is branded as a traitor. Unsure of who to trust, he tentatively teams up with Natasha Romanoff, also known as Black Widow, on their journey to find the truth behind the lies. Along the way, they make unexpected alliances in Sam Wilson, a former Air Force Paratrooper, and are hunted by the ghost known only as The Winter Soldier.
Markus and McFeely's screenplay is taut, cohesive, and enthralling from start to finish. The story exudes intrigue and intensity, with so many layers that are peeled back as the narrative unfolds. It is so much more than surface-level action. They take the time to examine what drives the characters, and in a very real way, ground them with doubts and fears we all share. It is as much a character study as it is an action-spy film, and first-time Marvel directors Anthony and Joe Russo ensure that all the pieces fall right into place at the opportune moment.
The Russo Brothers interject a certain realism rarely afforded in the ever-expanding Superhero genre. Somehow, despite the idea of a frozen super soldier being so fantastical, their collective vision allows the film to be firmly grounded in a world where it is entirely believable that this could be happening at our highest level of government (art imitating life a tad too closely, but I'll digress). It therefore possesses this tangible, gritty quality that grips the audience from the beginning, and never relents. From their strategic use of visually interesting locations to spectacular stunt choreography, to the careful introspection of the motives and fears of the main characters, attention is paid to every single detail. Henry Jackman's score is arguably one of the best of its time. The melodic pieces that shift so effortlessly from light and delicate to robust and overpowering carry the intensity of the moments through so that they reverberate within you, bolstered by the exceptional acting talent as well as visually stunning sequences.
As events unfold, Cap begins to see that the modern world clandestinely fights its battles behind cloak and dagger. The hard-won freedom he thought his death secured now appears to be nothing more than a smokescreen, with the powers that be learning how to get their subjects to hand over their freedoms willingly for the sake of 'security', starkly mirroring the very same problems we face in our current reality. Steve must make a decision on what kind of world he wants to live in, and see where the pieces fall. Not only that, but Steve, Natasha, and Fury all find themselves questioning what they had previously known to be true, and who exactly they can trust. This is not only expertly dealt with in the insightful dialogue, but in the way they interact with one another. Exploring these psychological aspects grounded these characters in a way that allowed us to relate to their respective turmoil and tribulations.
Chris Evans returns as Captain Steve Rogers, and really brings his a-game to this new journey that will shake the foundations he thought he had carefully laid. Scarlett Johansson reprises her role as Natasha Romanoff, the enigmatic spy who waded into a war-largely due to being inspired by Steve. After her, Steve, and the other Avengers battled the aliens in New York, Fury tasked her with helping Steve acclimate to this new world, as well as training him in stealth ops. While the dialogue is already rich, witty, and poignant, Johansson manages to bring a depth and sincerity to Natasha we have not been privy to before. With all her defenses stripped bare and her covers exposed, she finally allows Steve to see the real Natasha, and in so doing, inadvertently discovers a part of herself she had carefully hidden. Scarlett truly does a remarkable job communicating as much with her body language and facial expressions as she does with her words. For anyone who is paying attention, you can see there is so much more that lies beneath the surface that she is just beginning to tap. Not to mention the natural chemistry that her and Evans possess is well-utilized here, given their history and long-standing friendship dating back to 2004 when they co-starred in Brian Robbins' comedy-drama The Perfect Score (2004). Evans and Johansson even wrote a good portion of their dialogue in their scenes together. Their introspective moment at Sam's house showed such a sensitivity and vulnerability, and was heartfelt and moving, showing their need and desire to trust one another. In all the little nuances, you can see that after their years training together, they have developed this effortless second-hand that's magical to watch.
Of course, Samuel L. Jackson is back as the iconic Director Nick Fury, along with Cobie Smulders as his second-in-command, Maria Hill. Jackson succeeds in toning down his usual sarcastic tone, tempered with the severity of the events that transpire, and shining a light on Fury and Nat's connection. Sebastian Stan really has the opportunity to showcase his grit and diversity here, providing the iconic Winter Soldier with a visceral intensity rarely seen before on film. He is very nearly Steve's equal, and their epic fight sequences, mostly performed by Evans and Stan, are true to form. Hayley Atwell turning in a small appearance as the now 90-year-old Peggy Carter was as riveting as it was heartbreaking. Achieving her dramatically-aged persona with a combination of make-up and digital rendering, the effect was seamless.
Part of the film's ability to firmly plant itself in the real world was the Russo's choice of locations. The vast majority of The Winter Soldier's events are filmed at some of the nation's most historical landmarks in Washington, D. C., from the Lincoln Memorial in the opening scene where Steve and Sam are jogging, to the Theodore Roosevelt Bridge, where Cap single-handedly takes down a QuinJet. The action and fight scenes were filmed mostly in downtown Cleveland, Ohio. Perhaps most astoundingly though, while the 'Lumerian Star' is not a real ship, the intriguing sequence was actually filmed aboard the Sea Launch Commander, an originally Scottish ship built by Kvaerner Govan Ltd in Glasgow that first launched in 1997. After Govan went bankrupt, she was acquired by the Russian company Energia. While the Lumerian Star is meant to serve as a satellite launch platform, the real ship functions as a rocket launch platform, and is currently docked in Long Beach, CA. The opening stealth siege by Cap almost single-handedly as the camera pans around the perimeter of the ship provides the necessary scope and scale, and was brilliant to watch! Even the Captain America exhibit in the film is a real exhibit at the Air and Space Museum at D. C.'s Smithsonian, complete with the authentic shield used by Chris Evans during this film! This is really the quintessential example of life imitating art imitating life.
The Russos' choice of not only a variety of different tones for the action sequences as well as a conglomeration of fighting styles really serves to balance the film out. The covert, stealth siege of the Lumerian Star features some superb parkour moves by Evans, an iconic, Bond-style takedown by Natasha to secure the engine room, and a tense build-up leading to taking back the ship. Cap's fight with Batroc, played by a UFC Welterweight Champion George St-Pierre, was well-matched and expertly choreographed. The attack on Fury and subsequent chase, featured as the last scene in the episode of "Agents of S. H. I. E. L. D." that aired prior to the film's release, was both jaw-dropping and exhilarating, employing a low-angle car-mounted camera for some intense moments. Cap's elevator brawl, which premiered as a special sneak peek following Thor: The Dark World (2013), was visceral and intense in a way that cannot be quantified. Evans and Grillo went on record as saying they realized they had to really land their punches, and left each other black and blue by the end-a commitment to their craft.
Cap's ensuing stand-off with the QuinJet on the Roosevelt bridge as he's fleeing the Triskelion was a perfect superhero moment, and one you could only believe at the hands of Captain America. The rooftop scene so perfectly reflected the second-hand that Steve and Nat have developed. The freeway chase scene leading into the brilliant downtown fight was one of the most exhilarating. Most of the hand-to-hand combat scenes between Cap and Bucky were performed by Chris Evans and Sebastian Stan, specifically the amazing knife fight in the middle of the street. The Russos' choice to film this in broad daylight was brilliant-because if you are fortunate enough to have your lead actors so well-trained that they can perform the action themselves, then you certainly want to capture every glorious second of it!
FINAL VERDICT: So seamless and fluid, the film is quite simply perfection. Not only is it one of the best superhero movies of all time, one of the best sequels ever created, but one of the best films as a whole.
10 of 10 - Rewatch Value: 10
~AleXa~ An original IMDB user for over 20 years
Rev July 12, 2022 - 7/12/22 TU in 3D at home.
| 10
|
A whodunit, for sure. But within 20 minutes, you manage to figure out the entire thing which makes it a little annoying once you've spent two hours watching it just for it to come out in the end. It makes the entire thing seem pointless because it is so easily predictable, and takes FOREVER to get the answer out. I couldn't get attached to it and found myself doing other things, just to be like "well, obviously" in the end. Seemed like a fake clue, to me, and poorly put together.
| 6
|
Is this a scam, or has the capacity to be critical been lost due to the very sensitive and emotional subject of the film. For me, it seems like a joke... How could this momentous and dramatic event in our recent history be presented with so little means and ambition ? From books and historical reports, the boarding was a mess, planes were all over the sky, there were myriads of boats and ships, the beach were left with tons of discarded equipment and weapons... We see none of that. How can you give an idea of what it must have been with only a few sparking clean vintage planes, one small war ship, 12 period fishing or leisure boats... How could so many shots taken on site incorporate 1960's, 70's or even 80's buildings, street furniture, modern container cranes... How can it be night for the scenes at sea, and day for what happens on the beach, in Dover, or in the air at the same time ? How long can a spitfire fly after it has run out of petrol, and still manage to fight... For those who like history, it is a waste of time. For those who like action and war scenes, it can be watched but will be a disappointment For those who seek emotions and a peek at humans behaviour during the event, there is reasonably good acting, in a good British drama tradition. I suggest to wait for one year and watch it on TV where this show belongs.
| 3
|
Perhaps the most objectionable feature of this overrated film is its sneering, superficial view of Japan and the Japanese. Coppola's take on this appears straightaway in Bob's journey from the airport through the garishly-lit high-rise desert which is all we are shown of Tokyo to the ingratiating group of welcomers awaiting him at the hotel. But the point is hammered home in scene after tedious scene of Japanese speaking incomprehensible English (and even - good grief! - no English at all), Japanese behaving like idiots, Japanese in endless karaoke sessions, and shot after shot after shot of all those soulless big buildings! An alternative to this view of Japan is restricted to Charlotte's visit to Kyoto, a sequence so brief that if you'd blinked you'd have missed it.
What a dreary contrast all this is to Edward Zwick's 'The Last Samurai', which, despite its share of Hollywoodisms, shows a genuine interest in and respect for the country in which it is set.
| 4
|
The pace is very slow and contradicts the love story from season 1.Very dissapointed to see that magic gone.Season 2 is not extremelly bad, the issues and problems revealed are real. I think they should have done a total new serie with new characters about these problems. They are in all countries not only in USA.! Second, 20-30% of movies and series in the decade are about how the justice system is broken and unfair. I knew from begining they won't win. No point to see that again.
| 3
|
In 1976, Jodie Foster was 14 ... She shouldn't be playing that role.
| 5
|
Each episode got better and better revealing a little more each week. Very interesting. Love wandas acting. The vision was great too. Glad these guys got to spread their wings. Good job!
| 8
|
WOW !!! One word which cannot describe our Indian Army's contribution everyday which make us proud citizen of INDIA. What a movie, speechless !!!
| 10
|
It's understandable that this should be showcase for the next installment however the consistency of elements were not well honed in this second installment. Everyone is expecting more especially that it's a JK Rowling novel. Somehow, I myself were enjoyed but for one seating only.
| 7
|
The first 30 minutes I thought, it is a good beginning. But later it fell apart, all the fighting scenes. Why? In my opinion too long and too much
| 4
|
Interesting slow burner that keeps you watching. A little bit cliched in the flawed, tough, drinking detective (albeit a woman this time) whose relationships have fallen apart. A nice touch was the large and generally happy extended family, which is rare in any drama these days, and Mare reminded me a bit of Ethan Edwards in The Searchers, an outsider who can never settle. I liked the build up to the shock ending, although you could see it coming. Piles of backstory and lots of characters, but it was all handled well and in an engaging way that kept me interested throughout. Looking forward to episode 2.
| 8
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.