Review
stringlengths 6
10.3k
| Rating
int64 1
10
|
|---|---|
First of all, where was Harry Potter? Secondly, where was Voldemort?? I don't even know if Ron and Hermione we're in it and don't get me started on the Dursleys. Accio butterbeer, need to forget this movie.
| 3
|
Superhero movies are formulaic and I think fans are spoiled so we expect something fresh and exciting but it's hard to come up with anything new. This sequel is pretty much a rehash of the first with more of the same. Still the action and CGI fights were great. The story is weak but that's to be expected. It's hard to come up with new stories.
| 6
|
Great actors, great performance but there is no mystery. Not even close. Why did they choose such kind of script, I don't understand. Costumes are great, director is great, ambiance is okay. Total waste of resources and talent.
Just the humor of main character (detective) is good. Besides that there is not even a part in the script is okay. In short I don't recommend this movie. But we may think that why they are ready to waste such resources? I think the reason is Netflix. If there is a demand from big platforms great actors accept that. They may even dont read the script. This is Netflix project then it is obvious that we can get our (big) money. Producers are already okay if Netflix says "yes". If you bring great names to Netflix, Netflix is ready to accept. It seems that no one reads the script even the writer.
| 2
|
This movie was ok. Nothing incredible. Interesting idea but nothing special. This movie was not better than Joker, Once upon a time in Hollywood or The Irishman. Its just my opinion.
| 6
|
One of those where after watching, you feel like you need to wash the stench off of you.
| 1
|
Outside of the fact that the show is set in a world we already have a comfortability with, what can possibly be a positive?
There isn't a single charismatic character in the show. From the jump of GoT you could tell Tyrian was interesting, Arya was a badass, The Hound was complicated, the Littlefinger/Varys interactions had great dialogue and you even wanted to trot for dumb Jon Snow.
This show has no one to root for, the "politics" of the show are uninteresting and every character falls flat. I wouldn't want to have a conversation with a single on of them.
I'm perplexed by the high ratings.
| 2
|
Adapted from the 1996 manga of the same name by Taiyo Matsumoto, Ping Pong the Animation follows a young highschool student Smile and his many competitors in the world of elite ping pong as they all strive to become the best in Japan. Originally starting this series for the unique animation style alone, which was gorgeous, I stayed for a compelling character driven plot, with very human connections and misunderstandings, and the many explorations of work, goals, existence, and ultimately life's purpose. I didn't think a show about ping pong would have me questioning how I structure the frameworks of personal values, but it did, and I could not be happier for it. A short single 11 episode season, it ends beautifully and if you can get your hands on this series I could not recommend it more. Whether you're a fan of anime alone, ping pong, or neither, this series had me questioning if my kitchen table was really needed in my life and perhaps a ping pong table would get better use.
| 9
|
My wife wanted to watch this so we tried it and it was absolutely hilarious and I'm not being sarcastic. I genuinely laughed throughout and actually really enjoyed it. Gosling makes the movie in my opinion; he's hysterical. There's obviously the overarching political and social commentary but I didn't mind it and frankly didn't pay much attention to it. It's a silly, hilarious movie if you don't take it too seriously. There are many really bad "effects" where it's done on purpose and it made me laugh. Not sure if the filmmakers meant it to be as funny as I took it but I enjoyed it that way nonetheless.
| 7
|
This film is quite stupid and illogical. I am pretty sure that most people are too afraid to admit they don't understand it. It's like with "The Emperor's New Clothes". Everyone can see the Emperor has no clothes on, but by revealing their knowledge they are afraid that everyone else will believe they are stupid. I am the little boy spontaneously shouting that the Emperor is naked. Also, please notice that I watch the last half an hour of the film at double speed. That's how boring the film is. Finally, I do wonder how many of the jury's members actually watched this movie?! That said, this isn't the first time some weird inconceivable movie has won an Oscar.
| 3
|
Stranger Things is one of my favorite shows. It does everything right. I LOVE the characters. And the vibes. Season 1 is my favorite. I loved almost every second of the first season. Season 2 definitely isn't as good. It's still great but it definitely has some problems. But season 3 is amazing. I do still like the first better but it's still amazing and does a lot right. Can't wait for season 4.
| 9
|
My grandma got me a copy of the screenplay to this movie and I liked it a lot. I was really excited to watch Fantastic Beasts, but when I watched it I was kind of disappointed. They all say they are from America, but they all have British accents. That's kind of insulting. And it was really easy to guess what would happen(I mean i read the screenplay and all, but even my 6 year old brother could guess what would happen) The CGI didn't really improve from the harry potter movies. Kind of the same. But it still looks a little cool sometimes. This isn't a great movie, but at least it isn't boring. The main problem is that you don't have any feeling for it.
| 6
|
For the first few episodes, I enjoyed this very much. A novel concept, great acting - especially from Anya Taylor-Joy - and very solid writing and directing. However, after a while, I started to realise why it reminded me so much of Mad Men: not simply that it is set during (roughly) the same time period, but because, at its heart, it is fundamentally hollow. The surface, yes, is very attractive (the period detail, decor, clothes etc. are great), but as the episodes progress, it becomes clear that there isn't anything more to the story than what we can predict right at the start. That is, this is a fairly standard story of a plucky outsider taking on the stuffy establishment we have seen in a million other dramas of this type. I also came to like the central character less and less. This is one of those dramas that treats its protagonist's talent basically as a superpower (think the BBC version of Sherlock), which means that everything comes to her far too easily, with no sense of the blood, sweat and tears that talented people in the real world have to expend to develop their skills. Having your main character occasionally leaf through a book while draped decoratively over a chair does not count! I also found it dragging in the second half of its run - it could easily have lost one or even two episodes from its running time. So ... definitely a worthwhile watch, but not the masterpiece some have suggested.
| 8
|
This film is a beautiful piece of art. Though it shows Minnesota threw a New York eye, it shows a funny piece of self being. The film has wonderful acting by William H. Macy, Frances Mcdormand,and especially the hysterical Steve Buschemi. The film was filmed on a budget of a mere 7 Million Dollars only 13 years ago. It has a few known stars and was filmed almost all in Minnesota and North Dakota except for a few scenes in a set. The film is a short flick, 99 Minutes. But in that time changed Hollywood's perspective of film. Just for a note, the humor I say is mostly comedy drama, because only a few murders happen, but when they are really funny. The filming is beautiful, from a scene in a bar, to a scene in the middle of a field. For 7000K, that's pretty good. Yes this film is better then Avatar or any film in that concept. The acting is brilliant, the story hilarious and superb, and the setting and area is excellent.
Story- 10
Cinematography- 10
Acting- 9.9
Budget- 10
10/10
| 10
|
Dragon Ball Z is fun, it's entertaining, but is it good? No. The main acclaim of the show is because so many of us view it through nostalgia glasses. I loved it growing up but going back and rewatching it... honestly I gave up. There's so much filler. There's no meaningful plot, no character development and no character deaths matter because the Dragon Balls wish them back to life (and the sequels butcher the rements of anything that makes the characters great). Sure the action is fun and the memes are fun but there's no substance. If you want substance and memes maybe look to JoJo. Sure this was the anime of a generation (if not two generations, X and Millennials) but nostalgia alone does NOT make it good.
| 5
|
I don't mean to discourage anyone from finding joy or meaning in The Greatest Showman, but as someone who values truthful screen adaptations and authentic intersectional representation in the media, I have some fundamental issues with this film.
The Greatest Showman--even with its big budget, great cast, and good intentions on the surface--fails to come across as genuine to me. If I have to put aside the historical inaccuracies, I will, but not before saying that it was incredibly pointless to have this based on a real person. This film has nothing to do with P.T. Barnum--a man who grossly exploited the "oddities" of marginalized people to make himself rich--and I think it's in extremely poor taste to make a sensationalized, sugar-coated version of his story.
But even after putting all of that aside, on its own, the film is generic and lacking a genuine commitment to it's message of acceptance and inclusivity. This has everything to do with its framing. At it's core, the film frames the white male protagonist as the hero of marginalized people, using the diverse cast of "freak" characters as a collective plot device to further Barnum's development. This is a problem for me because Barnum is framed to be without the prejudice others are so filled with towards the "freaks," but never in the story does he actually defend their humanity or say anything to prove that he sees them as more than meal tickets. This is even more apparent by the fact that he never apologizes for having ignored and abandoned them. Furthermore, the majority of the "freaks" are lumped together as a whole, giving me no impression of their individual characters, their individual motivations, or any real impression that they have a working relationship with Barnum at all.
Because of this, I can't help but feel that the ultimately inclusive message of "be proud of who you are" stems from a purely systematic view of the audience. Or, they wanted to make money, and so they hopped on the "diversity is good" train without really caring about writing a deeper, more meaningful story.
Which begs the question, does this family film have to be more deep and meaningful? I guess not, it could be seen as harmless, but I, for one, have little tolerance for films that glorify reckless men like Barnum. I know its a simple rags-to-riches story, but if we're going to play around with empowering those who feel othered by society, I'd like something that doesn't revolve around a simplistic version of a historically problematic man that does the absolute minimum amount of work to represent people of various minorities.
I think the people who were helming this project thought--maybe even subconsciously--that generic would be fine, relatable, and free of controversy. If you don't think about it too hard, it's a fun movie for the whole family, but I personally find this kind of storytelling irresponsible and in poor taste, especially today.
| 2
|
With exagerated colors as promised, Greta Gerwig shows hers capacity to create a piece that's not like a bait for critics or those who love art cinema, but a commercial movie as deep as its's neccessary for it's time - except for it's publicity and public attraction. Besides it's reputed director, screenwriters, actors, references for great movies and the most popular artists composing it's soundtrack, the movie doesn't crave to be one masterpiece. Its just a regular movie that fulfills its role. Even with some metalanguage and self commentaries, it doesn't reach a self-awareness that makes this worthiest. The same works for it's social commentaries, that use strong words on the dialogues only to cover it's weakness of some social-revolutionary statement of it's own ideology. But that's ok and not something to demand on a dolls movie, right? Tho, the movie still have some high points like it's dinamicity, comedy, sensibility and editing. It will probably won, deservedly, the Oscar for best costume design. It's worthy what it's supposed to worth. It isn't what it selled it was supposed to worth. Very curious to know the film's future: if it will be forgetfull or timeless as Barbie, the doll, has been.
| 6
|
Simply Awesome
REVIEW: There's a pink-and-white wall, with iron fencing in most parts. It has a gate, which is locked and is being guarded to bar people from the adjacent slum to cross over to the other side where the educated and wealthy families dwell. That image, metaphorically, indicates the zone that this film is venturing into. It's underlined further with the closing visual of the film, where an airplane is seen flying right above the hutments of Mumbai's slum area.
Nagraj Popatrao Manjule's Jhund is not an outright sports biopic, even though it follows the usual beats of a good sports drama. The film is a commentary on what we as a society can do to help the have-nots identify their plus points and cross the boundary to leap onto the other, brighter side. Amitabh's Vijay Borade (modelled on Vijay Barse, a retired sports professor Vijay Barse, who has trained countless street kids in football and formed an NGO Slum Soccer) speaks adequately about it in a crucial part of the film, set in Nagpur's bylanes, shot wonderfully (Sudhakar Reddy Yakkanti). The camera slickly romances the city's landscape, especially the jhopadpatti (slum) where most part of the film is set.
Although the proceedings in this piece begin at a modest pace, they pick up wind in no time. Vijay Borade is on the cusp of retirement from his job as a sports professor in college, but in no mood to hang his boots yet. He's motivated enough to conduct adult education classes in his house for the locals at his own expense. The opposition from his son, aiming for education abroad, is evident but understated. When kids in a neighbouring slum catch Vijay's attention while playing football with a plastic barrell, he begins to coach them in the game, which gradually distracts from their life which is riddled with crime and drug addiction. But how far does he really go? Do they all give up their life in the dark alleys of crime and addiction? Do some of them or all of them get a chance to leap onto the other side? All this and more is answered through in the near-three-hour runtime of the film.
As a writer and director, Nagraj Popatrao Manjule manages to hold one's attention for most part of the film, however, the pace slackens in the second half, and it could do with a tighter edit. Also, what one does rue is that the pre-interval is high on energy and the post-interval run is high on drama - a balance there could have earned the film a few more brownie points. There is a smattering of some colourful characters in the first half which adds to the energy and even induces humour. While the narrative moves addressing several issues, there is adequate effort to show some engaging on-field sports, too. The arcs and story-loops for every spotlighted character have been crafted well; again, it would have had a greater impact a lot more if the editing was more focussed.
One of the centrepieces of the film is the subtlety with which several issues including caste divide, societal judgements, class difference, economic difference and women's education and rights are interspersed into the screenplay. The downside is that some of these issues divert the attention of the proceedings, breaking the overall rhythm of the story.
Words are seldom sufficient to describe how wonderfully Amitabh Bachchan aces the roles he chooses to play. This time, he's a retired sports professor who, despite hurdles and financial shortcomings, invests himself and his hard-earned money to protect and nurture kids from the slums of Nagpur. Here again, he has perfect and complete command on every scene where he appears - never overshadowing his team of players, always adding more power to them. What also gets your attention is the confidence with which over a dozen kids and young adults, like Ankush (also Don/Ankush in the film) perform. They hold your attention well despite being untrained actors. They are extremely convincing in the parts for which they have been cast. Rinku Rajguru and Aakash Thosar (seen in Nagraj's Sairat), despite smaller screen time lend able support to the rest of the cast.
To sum up, this one's a dramatic sports film, which may not have the typical thrilling moments around every corner for you, but the point it tries to drive home will definitely kick your insides hard.
In-depth Analysis
Our overall critic's rating is not an average of the sub scores below.
| 10
|
When a write this, this farce of a movie is ranked 10 in the top 250. Has anyone who rates this movie so highly actually seen it? The timing in almost every action is so unbelievable wrong. Anything happening a split second earlier or later would not have lead to the outcome portrait in the movie. I love comics and the don't have to be logical. But if you a make an illogical movie please make is obvious that you are making a farce. There is no logic in a house that just has been raided by the thugs to be proclaimed as "the safest place in Gotham". just a few scenes later. Don't make everything as realistic as possible, make a comic-movie. The badman-series where lovely to watch because they understood this to be true. OK, the acting is not to bad but almost all the action is horrible predictable.
| 2
|
It's definitely not a bad movie and you will get your money's worth. but it's literally a "meh" not up to the hype or Quinton Tarantino's other movies. final impression. Meh
| 5
|
Targeting the same people that finds no excitement whatsoever in real life but are not currently treated or confined in an appropriate clinic, the series also has a childish story that not fits at all the previous statements. To be clear, I am not blaming the producers and/or viewers but I definitely don't want to interact with neither.
On the good side of things, there is some good acting and costumes but the fighting scenes are always filmed so you cannot see a thing (so... bad).
If you are a fan of blood and gore (without any common sense sometimes) then this is a show for you.
For me is just a waste of time.
| 1
|
Listen I'll take X-Men over the avengers any day. boring characters
| 4
|
Even for the tough-hearted, 12 Years a Slave exhibits the most harrowing and painful depiction of slavery that only masterpieces are able to depict. It's clearly a masterful film, graphically portraying the 12 years of Solomon Northup's life in which he is abducted and sold into horrific slavery.
Overall, this film could not do at all any better at highlighting Solomon Northup's story. Director Steve McQueen forces strongly towards displaying brutal injustice, extreme cruelty and nightmarish acts inflicted by humans. Before heading any further, viewers with hearts made of glass should stop here. The violence and threat is very distressing. But again, only a masterpiece owns the ability to make you want to shield your eyes.
The performances are excruciatingly exquisite; each Black person demonstrates true tension within themselves and impact the overall impact. The direction, again, is truly amazing. The effects, small details and extended moments are unforgettable. Why wouldn't this amazing piece of history deserve high ratings and big awards.
If you liked this review, check out the full review and other reviews at aussieboyreviews.
| 8
|
This movie is just bad. I think critics just look for people yelling and go "yeah, this is a good movie." It's headache inducing noise. I don't know why every character has to say their lines at the exact time as everyone else. I love an art film. This wasn't it. 91%? Y'all are stupid.
| 3
|
Amsterdam nails it's casting plus an incredible job by Cinematographer Emmanuel Lubeski and a beyond perfect Make-up job by Nana Fisher. Omg- is this film incredible when it comes to those two things. Top that with a breathtaking performance by Christian Bale, much like The Fighter, stealing every scene he is in- Wow what an Actor. The supporting cast is also great but pales in comparison to Bale's work.
Some of the Scenes in terms of direction are really well done. This is the type of film that must be watched on the big-screen to get the full experience. Watching Margot Robbie, Zoe Saldana and other actor's faces so flawless on the big screen because of the incredible make-up and cinematography is so great- they look like stars back in the B&W days of film.
Story and Direction 6/10, elevated to 8 by Bale plus Fisher plus Lubeski.
| 8
|
I must admit I wasn't expecting what I got out of Superbad. Seth Rogen is one of my current favorite actors in the comedy genre and I knew he would perform well and bring some laughs but as for the rest of the cast I was hesitant. Jonah Hill was completely unknown to me and I only knew Michael Cera as the cute, innocent kid from Arrested Development. I was very skeptical if they could bring the laughs that I desired. To top off my hesitation to watch this was the fact I am not a big fan of teen oriented comedies. But I gave it a shot and was on the floor laughing.
The story follows two seniors who are about to graduate from high school and who wish to do something 'superbad' before they graduate. Both seek to loose their virginity at a party a fellow student is having with the girls of their dreams. They are told to bring the large amount of beer required and both seek off to obtain. What follows is their zany adventure to obtain alcohol and make it to the party all with the help of their friend Fogell a.k.a. McLovin who has an interesting connection with two local police officers.
I must admit I was dead wrong about every question that arose in my head when I saw the previews. Michael Cera and Jonah Hill are both more than capable of bringing tons of laughs to the screen. Even when opposite of more experienced stars like Seth Rogen and Bill Hader. Cera turned out to be more funny of the two though he is actually the quieter one. Hill got annoying a few times in which I had to turn away in disgust but was fine 90% of the time. I guess it was his whinny voice, it just got on my nerves.
The movie really did bring back my high school days and some of the crazy stuff that went on during it. Everything was quiet believable, maybe a little hard to come by but nothing seemed impossible that was portrayed in the movie. I guess that made the film even funnier. Everything made sense (unless you count the crazy cops). It really brings back great memories of times of innocence back when we were seniors in high school. Anyone wanting to get back to those times and remember high school memories way want to check this out.
Now the film is really dirty. They say f*** around 190 times and most of the time it's uncalled for or at least most parents would say so. There are sexual innuendos at every turn and sex is usually the reason behind most jokes. Heck the plot is based on getting laid. Therefore I would definitely say if you are a parent don't take your kid to this if they are under 16. They won't get it and they'll just learn a lot of words they shouldn't be saying yet. For everyone between 16-30 I think they'll find it hilarious. I don't know about older age groups though.
Superbad is funny though it is extremely dirty. It is one of the funniest films I've seen in years. It is a new teen comedy classic that outdoes almost every other comedy coming out nowadays. The film does drag a little in the middle. For about 15 minutes I didn't laugh but other than that the jokes are none stop. Everyone contributes to the comedy and makes you laugh at least once. Just a great comedy in my opinion and hope you feel the same way. Just go see it, give it a chance and you may very well just like it. Look at me. I was very hesitant and found that I loved it.
4/5 stars
| 8
|
I read almost all Gaiman's books, he also claimed to have lots of impact over this series.. first episode was decent 8/10, but as story continued it was dull, terribly paced, too long stretched episodes, poor jokes for 8 y.o., not to mention terrible costumes and fx.
| 5
|
Lately children's TV has become dumber and uglier.. goof's and weird stuff. Of course within all those goofy shows there are some stars, but Avatar surprised me a great deal. OK the draw-ed style is semi anime. Which is a big trend in cartoon drawers now, and should not be. We should get back to the details, the mood. However Avatar makes up for that with a dazzling character cast. Some with an underlying depth that will surface as you watch the series. Sokka is the shows comedy character, and yet he comes through when things get rough, however the character I mean the most is Prince Zuko. The banished sun of the Evil Fire Lord. On an forever going hunt for the last avatar, to capture him and re-win his fathers respect. Prince Zuko is the regular villain of the show, but he alone should be enough reason to watch through the series. Not because he is cool or badass (which he is), but because he is the character that shows the most of his personal sides through the series. Other than that the show holds a good quality, with decent action scenes and a not to repetitive storyline. I love it, because it shows that children's TV is not totally lost.
| 10
|
I watch this me after 12 year later but still i able to connect very well the story is little bit different from other flims. Must watch it.
| 7
|
Im a little jaded having just recently watched "cold skin" and "The vanishing", both "lighthouse keepers go crazy" films. That said I was very enthusiastic about this unique, and supposedly timely take, staring patterson and dafoe. Man was I bored and disappointed. The black and white 4:3 filming adds nothing to the story and feels like a gimmic. Nothing about the characters, atmosphere or pacing lends itself to that style so instead it comes off as cloying, begging you for praise. Instead of any kind of build up of tension our two leads just scream each other for 2 hours until we get an oh so tiresome violent ending I couldnt bring myself to be upset over.
Im giving this a 5 because dafoe and patterson I think played their parts well, but frankly this added nothing to the genre and felt as disingenious as a mandatory highschool christmas play. Critics, I get it, youre feeling unloved because serial superhero films are in vogue again but just because something is abstract doesn't mean it should earn automatic oscars.
| 5
|
The Ben Affleck career renaissance continues apace with this masterfully measured and understated piece of directing, which adapts the so-bizarre- it-can-only-be-true story of a fake movie used as cover for a CIA rescue operation, into an old-school '70s-style political thriller laced with shades of self-reflexive Hollywood satire. Argo successfully balances scenes of seat-gripping tension and joyously grouchy humour that feels effortless but takes a sure hand to pull off. Minor historical inaccuracies have to be swallowed along the way for the benefit of snappier pacing. But overall this remains a fascinating true story, delivered with great performances, pin-sharp dialogue and award-winning facial hair, and would make a fine double-bill with the underrated Charlie Wilson's War. The new Eastwood? ...maybe.
| 7
|
The biggest drawback of this film is the unrealistic grooming of these stone age people. Nicely trimmed beards, no different from today! As about $51m was spent on making this movie, that is not so hot.
The story is okay, but drawn out, making it boring and then also having to read what is being said. As they were not speaking any known language, why wasn't simplified English used instead? That would have made it certainly more watchable. The developing relationship between wolf and man was the only savior, creating interest.
| 4
|
I have to say, I'm not a fan of Stephanie Germanotta a.k.a. Lady Gaga. But I'm a fan of movies and I myself studied screenwriting (and journalism). This said, I can't say her performance isn't (very very) good. That's the first "surprise" of the film. We've seen her before in a screen (though not a big one) but she prove she can star a film.
Of course Gaga sings amazing, that's out of discussion too, which takes us to the second surprise: Bradley Cooper can sing and play, and also very well. And he can direct, too. The movie isn't very challenging through the lens, still the job is well done.
The problem in this movie is the story itself. There's a point when you wonder when is going to happen something really breathtaking, but it doesn't, it falls into a cliché drama with only one way to end. And you're really hoping it won't end like that because if it does, then you'll feel like you've wasted 2h16m of your life (and money, if you watched it in a cinema)
I'm not saying is bad, I'm only saying is ridiculous to think this is one of the best movies ever made (like so many people these days). This is a film where you will enjoy certain things: Gaga acting and singing; the criticicism of a pop industry (which is as shitty as the movie describes it) and Bradley Cooper directing, singing (damn well) and playing the guitar like a natural born rockstar.
But seeing this in IMDB top 250 (well, of course the IMDB doesn't stands up for greatest movies in the history of cinema, only stands for Most Popular Films in the (immediate) present) is absurd (8.3??!!).
Yeah, of course the fans of (maybe) the biggest pop star in the past decade had something to do with it. But if someone tells me to recommend a very good movie, or at least a good one, this one is definitly not on the options. If you want to see a plain movie where you know what's going to happen since the first minute, then this is the right movie for you.
Overall: Good acting (from a singer) and great singing and performing (from an actor); well directed but with a script that's only making this more and more soap opera as the time goes by. Too predictable and it felt like an excuse to show the world Lady Gaga can act (and Cooper could be a rock/country star) while it forgot that is a movie and should have a good story too, not just good acting. But of course, this will be nominated for many Oscars, because the Academy gets worse every day.
This movie is an example of how marketing makes people think they're watching good movies and future cinema classics, when actually, they aren't.
| 5
|
Sadly Robert DeNiro is past his prime and really brought down this movie. Although 3 1/2 hours long, DeNiro ruined the outstanding acting of Joe Pesci and Al Pacino. If you decide to watch this, make sure you take NoDooz.
| 2
|
And dont get me wrong, I dont mind a good villain or a good troublemaker in a show, they can make great stories and drama/problems for the main character(s). Like Janice from Sopranos, an annoying, hypocritical person who brought constant problems but she was written excellent, you understood her motivation and could predict her responses to an extent because of that. Dr. Smith on the other hand, at least in this incarnation of Lost in Space, is (extremely) poorly written, her actions are an end in themselves and is nothing but an annoyance and detractor from anything good about the show and hold back the pace. She does bad things only to do them and make problem. Theres nothing beyond that, they made her a troublemaker and thats it, no logic beyond,not really anyway,. Sure, they tried some terrible inconsistent backstory but it was, again, an end in itself with no logic nor was linked to character "evolution" on the show. So all in all, I love sci-fi, I liked this show for the most part however Dr. Smith ruins it. I actually skipped forward a lot, sometimes I just paused and stopped wathing for a while and resumed in the evening because how stupid and annoying that character was. So please, either get some better writers or learn to write better characters because arguably Dr.Smith in this show is one the of worst and most poorly written character Ive seen in any show, ever. Shes not even a character,just an animated medium with no personality created for making drama and trouble.
| 5
|
I would rather watch a 99 year old woman act with real musculature in her face than a near-60 year old injected and frozen trying to show emotion...unsuccessfully. I was so distracted every time Kidman's face came on screen. Her lips make speaking look difficult and painful and her cheeks are....weird. HOLLYWOOD: AGING IS OK. It honestly ruins the whole show. Does she love her children? Hate them? Is she happy or sad? I honestly can't tell because every facial expression is the same frozen, over-plumped, injected tragedy. Human emotions move human emotions, and authentic facial expressions are key. Nicole: it's ok. Play your age and stop the madness that pressures other women to follow.
| 1
|
Actually, 0/10 stars.
I gave up watching after one hour. The jigsaw on the table was more interesting. I feel the same way about Marvel movies; I tried to watch a couple but they are just total rubbish. Now watching BBC detective dramas, far more interesting and very well written, directed and acted !
| 1
|
The second Venom movie has a running time of 97 min. Nearly 30 min are an introduction and just Brocks daily life with his symbiote and his emotional and professional setting.
It could have been just this - Eddie Brock and Venom, their relationship and how they come along. Would have been great.
But this has to be a spectaculous sequel and with the teaser in the end credits from the first Venom movie, we know where it's going to go: Venom vs Carnage.
Well... I'm not telling any Spoylers.
This movie wants you entertain and it does, if you're not that picky about storytelling, character development, logic and something called suspense and surprise.
The film is very straightforward in its narrative and follows its predictable plot points, resulting in a fairly short running time while trying to use the scenes as effectively as possible.
Tom Hardy is great as Eddie Brock and does a really good job. The chemistry between him and Venom is hilarious, the depiction of their relationship is well executed and the fun parts work perfectly.
The CGI is well done, too, but sometimes too fast, too chaotic.
The movie wants to entertain, not more, not less, and I think, it does.
It's not a drama, it's not about deepness in characters and it's not a character driven movie, it's a story driven movie.
Skip some inconsistencies, some dubious motivations, some one-dimensional characterizations and take it as it is: funny, frenetic, dumb entertainment.
Stay till the end credits, there comes an unmotivated teaser for the next Venom movie: Like I said, don't try to find logic in the storytelling, take it as it is and perhaps you might enjoy this second part.
5 stars because of the high quality actors, the fun parts between Brock and Venom and the set design of the movie.
| 5
|
It's a very good show that has many important messages. People don't deal with everyday stuff in the same way. Don't judge, be respectful, be considerate, be tolerant, you never know what might be going on in someone else's mind. Talk, to your friends, your parents, tell the truth even if you feel ashamed. Say things before it's too late. The truth will eventually come out anyway. . Some people are focusing on what a drama queen the main character is, but this focus is wrong. It is difficult to watch, and it should be, even when the viewer knows exactly what's going to happen.
| 8
|
1000 ways to die for dummies?
Main character is a drug addled neurotic woman who isn't compelling. Watched 3 episodes and wasn't sorry, cheerful, or curious about her deaths after the first couple.
| 3
|
Great music good acting poor story. Very predictable it's every rich person story gets all they want then poof gone then poof it's back like good acts like singing Woverine. But just so much fire it feels like Micheal Bay directed this film.
| 5
|
Probably the most over-rated movie of the 1990's. Who is Forrest Gump? What is inside his head.., or heart, for that matter? All we can establish is that he is unintelligent enough to make it in the army. Is he handicapped? Not? He is like an anti-person, whom everything happens to, instead of making things happen.., until he acquires inspiration and ambition out of the blue and goes on an impossible running tour. I have not been able to discern an actual point this movie is trying to make, nor establish just who this mentally-challenged millionaire really is. Maybe he appeals to so many people because they identify with him? That is a truly scary thought, but apparently, it seems to be the case. A pointless, stupid movie.
A salute to powerlessness and vacuousness.
| 3
|
The Witcher manages to bring forth a lot of what I consider essential for a good show. Unfortunately it also brought forth the SJWs from under their rocks. The agenda is clear; with race swapping and genderbending only being the most obvious hints. I've deducted one star from my score due to this. Unfortunately I believe I shall have to revisit the review to deduct another, once season 2 is out.
| 7
|
Good build up, but unfortunately anti climatic with too many superfluous plot points.
| 7
|
After hearing so many people say this movie was absolutely amazing, I had to see it. I'm a big fan of horror and in today's world there aren't that many good horror movies because they either rely on jumpscares and gimmicks. So imagine my disappointment when I found out that this film was just another gimmicky horror flick that plays on one specific part of human nature (being able to see) instead of actually being a film. You've probably heard this by now, but this film is pretty much Netflix's "A Quiet Place" but only without the few things that made Quiet Place slightly above average. The acting is good, but other than that, there's nothing else. It's just an absolute bore of a film that at no point had my interest. Horror films that try and take something away from humans to see how we survive like being able to see or make noise are, in my opinion, lazy. Why not write something with the good elements of horror that people like without needing a gimmick and some semi-likable characters? Halloween didn't need a gimmick, Friday the 13th didn't need a gimmick, so why does this need a gimmick? Because it's the only thing that makes this film slightly interesting and tense to people who just see the same boring blockbusters because they're popular.
| 3
|
All aspiring filmmakers should take some notes; crime novelists could take a couple of lessons as well; this is how tales of crime should be adapted into compelling screenplays, and this is how crime thrillers should be concocted.
What an immaculate work; albeit I was already aware of its encouraging reception, it still managed to leave a lingering impression.
One of the main reasons being its neat writing which wasted no time in trifling worries and refrained from indulging in unnecessary subplots; the script, from beginning to end, stayed very much to the point and seldom detracted from its intended course, which I admired.
Other than its writing mastery, the performances too had their significant contributions; both the leads did great in their respective positions, and they had to gel well together, and they did, which in return produced more anticipation for the viewers; it made things more memorable, I reckon.
| 9
|
Very funny, interesting stories legends key and peele.
| 10
|
if you like spy movies with political intrigue and massive conspiracy theories about secret organization corrupting our society from within while trying to destroy the world. then you'll love this movie. if you like actions films with high flying explosions, awesome hand to hand combat and gun fights galore. then you'll definitely like this movie. this movies is basically a spy conspiracy thriller wrapped in an action packed superhero burrito. this isn't a supernatural sci fi action film like Thor the dark world or Ironman...but its definitely something to watch. now ill be honest i didn't like Ironman 3, not so much because the movie was bad, but because the story essential killed ironman and ridiculed his arch nemesis the Mandarin. i would have liked the story for any other movie, but not that one. then came Thor: the dark world....awesome!!!love that movie and now with this second installment of Captain America...i don't even know what to expect out of the next Avengers movie. Joss Whedon has his work cut out for him. my only complaint is that i kept hearing it was supposed to be better than the Avengers and better then the Dark Knight, but honestly those two movies are part of the pantheon of not only the best comic book movies ever made , but some of the best movies ever made...period. in the case of this movie,even if its up there with the best comic book movie ever made, it's still not in that league, but i appreciate the ambition. honestly i thought Thor the dark world was better, but that is just my humble opinion. the villain of the story, the Winter Soldier, was essentially the antiCap...his same speed and strength but much colder in his execution. the fight scenes were great, and capt himself got a noticeable upgrade in fighting style for this movie...he embodied the captain America from the comic books. i hope we get to see more of the Winter Soldier and his story in the future because he is a very cool character. o yes and one more thing, Quicksilver, Scarlet Witch and Dr. Strange...we are definitely getting them. enjoy the film
| 8
|
Should only be watched to keep up with culture or whatever, pretty un-innovative. These movie makers are billionaires and this is what they produce? Wow.
| 4
|
Bird Box held the spotlight for the internet for a short while. This, however, does not make the movie very great. A wonderful concept was used to tell a suspenseful story, but it definitely could have been told in a more appealing way.
| 6
|
I watched three episodes and it was a real struggle. I can't say how close it was to the game, because I've never played it. Is it a bit like every other zombie like series/film? Maybe. But that's not my problem with it. The plot is thin, the acting a bit wooden and not entertaining or intriguing. It needs to be one of the two.
Maybe I missed the point but the opening scenes/episode didn't seem to tie up with the next episode. There has to be a hook that pulls you in and makes you want to watch more or a character that you root for. For me it had none of those things.
I don't think I'll bother to persevere with it. For those that love it, good luck to you.
| 4
|
Wes Anderson is the darling of highly sophisticated story telling. High flying from political satirical humor to world wars and Agatha cime tale suggestions , Artistically Budapest hotel , costumes, scenery audio , camera angles and all round production values second to none! ! Bottom line, for me personally , I felt totally numb and therefore had no desire to attempt at keeping up with the so called humor ? Mister Anderson thanks , albeit in me you will not find me viewing any further exaggerated stretches of pointless complicated ghastly humorless junk....
| 2
|
It's almost hard to tell if I enjoy Venom: Let there be Carnage more than the first Venom film because I didn't know what to think of it. However, the final third of movie convinced me that this was a good movie despite the craziness of the first half of the movie. My only two complaints are that the film should've been longer and there should've been more Carnage! Overall, a whacky but enjoyable movie with a very interesting mid credits scene.
| 7
|
I came into this with low expectations. It has managed to surprise me with how utterly boring and awkward it is.
It is beautiful. The shots, the costumes the works. That is one thing he has going for him, and I now completely understand a big reason why I found Cloverfield lane so amusing to watch even though its over the top and weird. He truly has moments of brilliance in setting up a scene.
But as a story and a musical its incredibly boring. The songs are completely forgettable for the most part, the singing is using soft, falsetto voices, making it often difficult to read any emotion from them and in some cases even difficult to understand at some points. The dancing of our stars seems like they are just trying to get the steps right. There's no ease of movement that musical lovers are expecting and are used to. When you take into account that the choreographies themselves are not that grand or impressive, it makes it even more obvious that our stars had no time to think about the emotion of the scene, but were focused on getting the steps right. There's no lightness to it when you compare it to classical Gene Kelly movies for example. It makes it very boring to watch, because there is no chemistry. I found myself more interested in the costumes and the back rounds than the characters.
Its not funny, but its not serious enough either. And Emma Stone is amazing for funny, for me at least. This one didn't get a laugh out of me. It didn't get me invested in the characters either. I think its partly because for the longest time the movie makes us think the characters themselves don't really care, so why should we? And this kind of superficiality would work if the music numbers were more exciting and fun.
There is a reason Audrey H. was dubbed in certain movies, they understood that they needed a strong, clear, big voice.
This movies choices baffle me.
The only reason I can honestly think of this being praised this much is people going along with ''professional critic'' and the movie attracting an audience that hasn't seen musicals before with Emma and Gosling. I could understand how someone who hasn't seen any of the amazing musicals out there, would be in love with this movie. And if this movie inspires them to look those up and see what they are missing, i'll be satisfied.
| 2
|
It's a comedic(?) drama set primarily in New York City in 1933, with flashbacks to 1918-1919 Amsterdam. It follows three friends who met during World War I. Fourteen years later, they are caught up in a political conspiracy in the United States.
Burt Berendsen (Christian Bale) is a doctor married into a high-society medical family. During the war, he becomes friends with African American Harold Woodsman (John David Washington), who, after the war, becomes a lawyer. After both are seriously wounded in the war, they are cared for by Valerie Voze (Margot Robbie), a nurse from another high-society New York family.
The former commander of their regiment, Bill Meekins (Ed Begley, Jr.), dies under suspicious circumstances. The victim's daughter, Elizabeth Meekins (Taylor Swift), asks them to investigate. They determine her father died from poison, but suddenly Elizabeth herself dies. Burt and Harold are accused of her murder but avoid arrest.
The plot then unfolds with a mysterious cabal of businessmen trying to take over the American government. They eventually enlist the aid of retired General Gil Dillenbeck (Robert De Niro) in their efforts to unmask the conspiracy. Finally, a dramatic ending exposes the plotters, and all live happily ever after.
This movie is bad. The filming is good, and the players say their lines well. However, the writing is awful, and I didn't hear one laugh in the small audience in which I saw the film. There are apparent efforts at humor involving a glass eye and the recreational pastime of birding. The film's last ten minutes are an apparent effort to address the current political climate in the United States, but it is poorly done.
| 2
|
Ek Haseena Thi is a Great Prison Movie with a tale for revenge. Urmila is the innocent girl, who gets arrested and sentenced to prison of a crime she never committed. The man responsible for this is Gangster Saif Ali Khan who convinces her to lie in court and runs off, leaving her to rot. From Innocent to Rough is a major part of this film's character Urmila. She escapes from Prison and goes for revenge. If you haven't seen the film, I wont tell you the ending. It is a fantastic ending with attitude. Urmila gives a Brilliant performance and i cant think of any other actress, that could of made it better. After watching Urmila in Bhoot and This, You can see she is very talented. Saif Ali Khan is Supern as the Villain who uses and abuses girls. Great Film, worth the watch.
| 8
|
In a very polarizing genre, where most films seem to be hit or miss, Susanne Bier has delivered a solid post-apocalyptic offering in "Bird Box." While the source material may be somewhat stale, Bier is able to weave a convincing web of dread, danger, and suspense to keep us on our toes. A strong ensemble cast fills in the rest.
I haven't read Josh Malerman's novel (released in 2014), but this particular tale of the end times -- in which people start dying inexplicably by suicide -- has been seen before, perhaps most notably in M. Night Shymalan's "The Happening" (2008). To bring a fresh film adaptation of "Bird Box" to the table is therefore an ambitious project, but director Susanne Bier has really hit all the marks with this one. Maybe we can all forget that "The Happening," er, happened? Because this is just a far superior film all-around.
"Bird Box" is presented in the familiar flashback format. In present day, we have Malorie (Sandra Bullock) desperately escorting two children down a dangerous river; in flashbacks, we learn of the events of the past five years. Like a lot of post-apocalyptic films, there are lots of questions, and not too many answers. But the audience is thrown enough of a bone to satisfy our natural curiosities -- we see the breakdown of society in some very harrowing sequences, which leads way to a cast of characters being isolated together in one household in a southern California neighborhood. Bier takes enough time to foster just enough character development to make things interesting without venturing into "filler" territory -- and this is supported by strong acting from Bullock, Malkovich, Howery, and others. While the unknown apocalyptic force is referred to as a "creature" or "creatures," none of this is seen, and there is little if any evidence to prove the exact nature of the threat. Some people seem to be immune, or even attracted to this dark force. To my disappointment, this particular concept is never really fleshed out in the film, and seems to almost be a forgotten subplot. Nevertheless, it adds mystery and tension, and ultimately ends up working in the film's favor.
Once the flashbacks end and the film enters its climax, it starts to lose a little bit of steam. There are a few sequences towards the end that reminded me of a bad episode of "Lost," and the ending itself is underwhelming if a little bit contrived. Like I said, the source material doesn't seem to be groundbreaking -- but director Susanne Bier has done some really admirable work with what she was given, and was able to successfully bring this story to life on screen.
All-in-all, it's a great effort, and I'm excited to see what she does next. We'll all probably end up remembering "Bird Box" for the memes it has inspired over it's actual substance, but it's a solid film, and absolutely worth watching on Netflix.
| 7
|
Hi all! The film combines Science and Fiction. To be honest, they stuffed too much of everything. At the end of the film, I realized that I did not understand anything at all. My friends for this reason decided to revise it. And I think that the film in which nothing is clear is worthy of 3 stars. Thanks to all.
| 3
|
I started watching this with high expectation as I like sports anime and I expected something that could be like haikyuu, but boy wasn't I disappointed.
The anime is full of poorly executed tropes, your typical "friendship flashback makes you win". It's too focused on "natural talent" (the bloodline technique equivalent).
The animation is ... Different, and not in a good way, at all...
The character development makes absolutely no sense, they change their personality in a blink with no much reasoning and in a very short time.
| 1
|
Egger's film "The Witch" is my favorite horror film. Fiercely intelligent and thoroughly researched, the horror is not knowing what's happening in unfamiliar surroundings. The imagination can run wild with blame and suspicion when simply a good meal and a grounding in reality would be a much better approach.
There are projects that the filmmakers can get so deep into the material/process they undertake they forget there's going to be an audience watching that doesn't have the luxury of knowing why choices were made or the significance of allusions, visual or in dialogue. I felt this film fell very far off that cliff. It's beautifully made, incredibly well-acted and a beautifully shot movie. But the tension between the two characters quickly becomes their problem, and the audience is left outside the struggle, and I thought, "Well, hope you guys can work it out. I've got better things to do."
True, I may have had unrealistic expectations knowing who made the film and the actors that were cast. But the stilted dialogue (which works well in "The Witch") becomes so dense and full of allusion, I quickly lost interest.
What is most impressive is the look of the film. It recreates the chiaroscuro of the master filmmakers of the silent era in a very eerie way. The sound/music, as well, is haunting and sets the viewer in dread. But the two characters are so locked in their own individual struggles, I just didn't care. Defoe in particular is such a force and so thoroughly intimidating, I'd have moved to the other end of the island rather than put up with him. Pattinson is always interesting and as impressive as Defoe. But their struggle starts out at a very high level and never lets up. It became tedious to watch.
| 5
|
We really fell in love with this series. Then we found episode 6 where we lose our main character rheanyra to some new replacement actor who is different and several others were replaced. Was a totally different show. Why would any director ever do that?? It was never the same and we did not continue past E7. Huge let down... I Just can't believe they did this kind of thing to us all over again with this new series... makes me wonder how many others feel the same and haven't found a way to share the concern.
Then there was a huge lack of dragon action. Rarely did we get to see exactly what dragons gave them which is different than other competing communities.
Honestly, we might just avoid future series shows by HBO as there has been other let downs unfortunately.
Anyone else considering to drop MAX or is there anything incoming to be excited about?
| 3
|
This film is so interesting for me, because we are living in almost the neighbour country. And I was a little kid on that time... Iwould like to know whats happened then.
| 9
|
Same old except more unbelievable. story lacking and they tried to make it better with lots of unbelievable special effects. the people saying this is a great movie are probably teenagers who do not understand reality.
| 6
|
I really like this show but the earlier seasons were mich better. It should have ended around 6. The last couple of seasons were not that exciting.
| 7
|
Huge MCU fanboy here. This was a cool concept. I liked the freedom it gave writers and the artistry that came to the screen was great.
That said, I ultimately found myself not excited for each coming week like other shows. Maybe the lack of continuity and the short story format just isn't for me. Part of my excitement of the MCU is the tiny thread that holds unique stories together and you won't really find that here...which IS the point to be fair. While some episodes were more captivating than others, as a whole they just weren't exciting enough to keep me wanting more.
If they keep going with more seasons I'll probably watch, but at my own pace and I won't be holding my breath.
| 6
|
I wanted to like this so much as I had played the game and loved it. It started off pretty well but there is too much dialogue and not enough action. The pacing is very slow and not anything like the creepiness of the game. The young actress Bella Ramsey seems miscast and a little disappointing. I am surprised it rates so highly. I will stick with it until the end but it has now become a hard slog.
I am hoping the pace will pick up and it will become scarier as I am fighting to awake it's so slow and boring. I found the game so scary at times and have yet to be scared with the tv show . Here's hoping it gets better.
| 6
|
This reminded me too much of "Desperation ", even the similarities between the Jack character and Ron Perlman. Way too many holes in the story and it never gives you an opportunity to suspend disbelief and enjoy the show. Not once did I buy into the savant's character. It was laughably ridiculous.
| 2
|
"Inception" seems to be taking the premises of such films as "Peter Ibbetson," "Altered States," "Being John Malkovich" and "The Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind" to more elaborate lengths. Throughout this action flick – and that is what it truly is, despite its pretenses – I couldn't help thinking of the most recent James Bond thriller in which I lost track of who was who among the secondary characters because the identities they started with were revealed as false, but then the revelation itself was proved equally false (or at least dubious), to the point where you couldn't believe a word they were saying and ultimately you ceased to care.
With "Inception" we get a lot of technical jabbering from the mouths of Leonardo DiCaprio, Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Ellen Page about what everything means or might mean as they "share" and "engineer" other people's dreams in order to infiltrate their subconscious to achieve their corporate goals. These dream states are filled with the usual action staples of racing and crashing vehicles, explosions and the liberal use of automatic weapons, accompanied here by huge crumbling cityscapes (less effective than the more modest melting away of various smaller environments in "Eternal Sunshine"). There is nothing particularly dreamy about writer-director Christopher Nolan's dream world; aside from a few interesting computer-generated images like a whole city appearing to fold over upon itself, none of the effects stick in the mind or affect the viewer's juices.
Marion Cotillard contributes her trademark broken heartedness. Page gives the same performance we are familiar with from her telesystems commercials. Cillian Murphy emotes richly as the kidnapped son of an energy industry magnate. The heaving score by Hans Zimmer sounds like hundreds of others.
| 3
|
Selena is very very very beautiful and the story is so good also i like it.
| 10
|
I would have given this comic book adventure a solid "3," but because of the vomitous array of hype surrounding this film, I couldn't do more. I can't believe the sheer amount of glowing comments I received regarding this truly forgettable film. Worse still, I purchased the DVD, only to donate it to the first pre-pubescent teenager I could find, moments later. To make this review mercifully short, NO amount of action or CGI special effects will ever make up for a great script, or great acting performances. That why, like sugar-sweet breakfast cereal, "Trix are for Kids," which this pile of overrated movie-making is. When I judge any film, I simply count how many times I YAWN during the movie. I can't even count how many times I yawned watching this tedious bore, out loud. The writing was comic book, the acting was comic book, and so was the water-weak plot. But where the director REALLY took a stumble was during the midpoint, where this action flick suddenly took an unexpected (and fatal) 180-degree change of pace, attempting to build on the love affair between the principals by inserting a useless "serious" moment in the play that only succeeded in unnecessarily slowing the film's genre pace to a bizarre exposition of supposed "seriousness" where it had no business being at all. There is no way on earth I would sit through another WW sequel, and certainly not with this director at the helm.
| 2
|
"Stranger Things" is a captivating series that skillfully blends nostalgia, mystery and suspense. Set in the 80s. The series does a brilliant job of capturing the essence of that era, with a retro soundtrack and clever cinematic references. The young actors are remarkable, delivering authentic and moving performances. The plot is full of twists and turns and mysteries, keeping viewers hooked with each episode. However, the series can be predictable at times and rely on familiar narrative tropes. Despite this, "Stranger Things" remains an unforgettable television experience, combining suspense, nostalgia and endearing characters.
| 8
|
The story is not very different what you see on TV.What's more interesting is the time loop that makes this show..The only problem with the storyline is it is monotonous as this a time loop as characters keep reappearing and is annoying at times. Do pick this show for the variety ,bundled with unreasoned sci-fi.
| 9
|
This is definitely worth your while to see if you enjoyed the first movie. It is a very good sequel to the first chapter. We see Vito Corleone's (DeNiro) past and entry into organized crime and go into the future where Michael is trying to get the family legitimate. This movie is great. Just as strong as the first movie. I think that Coppola did a great job following up on the first part. the acting is great. DeNiro does a great job portreying the character Brando created in part I. If you like mob movies go for this series. It is all about respect with this family. go for this movie after you check out the first. then after this movie get part three. all of these movies are great but this one gets 9 out of 10
| 9
|
This is one of the worse movies we have seen in a long time. As one of the reviewers wrote here, it is very flat an exaggerated. Just a bad T&A movie, nothing more. The whole idea was to show as much of T&A as possible. Which is the only part I liked about this movie, but not worth spending 3 hours in the theater. DiCaprio with colored hair looks ridiculous. I guess, he was supposed to look young, but in fact looked like a middle age guys pretending to be younger. His actor performance was OK, but half-baked, does not add anything to what he has done before.
Also, I did not get the point of the movie. It almost looked like the producers admired the sell-person skills of the main character. The last scene in the movie was showing him teaching how to sell a pen at some seminar...
Everything was oversimplified, 1-dimensional, and predictable. Half-baked effort
| 2
|
Awesome movie but I couldn't watch it again. I'm so happy the Wolf never did, I didn't really care about the boy dying. Do I sound bad for saying that ? I felt as if I also was there in the snow. Great vision of the movie, I'm glad the director (Albert) never got lost while making it.
| 7
|
Amazing TV show
And very well Story
But I don't like how It give a bad idea about the muslim people
The muslim are Not Like this at all
I live with them
| 8
|
Before I rented this movie, I looked at the reviews and got my first clue...older women didn't rate it as highly as young males. That's weird for a movie about the kidnapping of two little girls. But now I get it.
This movie is long, boring, dark, and violent. Some of it is just plain old torture porn, trying to masquerade as something more meaningful. The plot, which isn't really about the kidnapping of two little girls, borders on the ridiculous, as do most of the characters. I fast-forwarded through a good bit of it without missing any of the story, and still it was too long.
As to why some people thought this was a 7- or 8-star movie...I don't even want to know. Really.
| 3
|
This movie intrigued everyone as we knew spider-man was not in the movie so it was a mystery to see how venom stood on his own anyway they over complicated his origin and that takes a huge part of the movie making it boring with a few cringe worthy jokes here and there. The final battle is one of the most forgettable ever in superhero movies it is basically venom against another cgi copy of himself and you know the drill. This is one movie with potential but with sony in charge it is another disappointment
| 4
|
Should be called the agent May show.... feminist rubbish where women constantly over power men..... even less desirable than Gods or men with super powers. Normal women who routinely do that which is highly unlikely in real life to further a misandrist doctrine that is ruining our social fabric. Agent Colson is a Mother figure in this for Gods sake. Agent May is the scary leader of the gang in reality. Why is in this day and age we have to have this ideology foisted upon us at every turn. The reality is a normal woman even if highly trained would fall after just one of the heavy punches she takes dozens of in this show. The men have to have super powers the women do not. This show is little more than Sickening indoctrination in the unrealistic, self defeating feminist fantasy.
| 3
|
Actors, effects, scenery, sound and music all wonderful. The storyline in my opinion was terrible. 10 times throughout each series always a conspiracy and so obvious. Then you have smith, must be the luckiest person alive always at the right place and time and I mean always, to perform some kind of devious act or scheme. The smith character storyline pretty much demolished the whole series. They could have made it a lot better.
Overall everything else was good and yes I have seen the original Lost In Space so I know Smith is a bad egg but this series just made it bad.
| 4
|
The show name itself make you excite to watch this series. Powerful acting by all the actors edge of a seat screenplay with brilliant music and action performances. The story of this series make it totally interesting to watch this 13 episodes series with a thrilling screenplay. We need more shows like this....
| 9
|
I enjoyed the first season of this show, though wasn't the best thing I've ever watched. Everything about this season premiere is bad. The camera work. The acting. The writing. Yikes.
Everything about it seems very forced and unnatural.
I was skeptical after the first season and this confirmed my suspicions that this one would bomb. I might make a hollow attempt at the second episode but it seems unlikely. The only impressive thing about this episode is whoever is fitting these costumes. Not styling them (god no) - but the point is I was so bored that the well fitted clothing is my only takeaway.
| 4
|
Lost in Space seems to have morphed into Stuck on a Planet with Sixty Others. Hardly a surprise when a ship aimed at going to Alpha Centauri runs on petrol.
I don't know what it is about modern shows but they all seem to be aimed at feeding the same boring format to mindless audiences.
This one ticked all the boxes for the new format. It picks an old show loved for how bad it was and just changed it so it would simply be bad and unlovable.
Dr Smith was changed from a conniving old man to a woman which sets the tone for the rest of the cast with it being predominately female. This on its own wouldn't be bad but they are all really annoying female characters. The studios seem to equate "strong woman" with "really annoying woman who will ignore sensible advice because it come from a a man and go do something stupid whilst delivering really bad lines". They should really allow actors to say "really? I have to say this?". Affirmative for pre-check clearance. A genuine line, I kid you not....
That takes us on to the male characters, most of whom aren't worth discussing as they don't get much of a part.
Mr Robinson is the only male character to get much of a part and that seems necessity more than desire. Totally sidelined character whose opinion is never sought and always ignored. He may as well not be in the show. He doesn't even get to play with power tools as his wife single-handedly repairs the ship because, obviously, she has a ph.d in engineering. An ex-US Marine, undefeated on the battlefield gets his nuts easily sliced off by a scriptwriter.
That brings us to the script which also seems to follow the new template. Have the really annoying female characters cause and/or stumble from one implausible disaster to the next even more implausible disaster whilst delivering the worst lines in the world and ignoring the men. Blah blah. Such a tired format and it's only a few years old.
Then the scriptwriters made the ultimate transgression. They messed about with the Robot.
By episode 3 I was simply wishing they would start killing people off but even that wasn't to be. It was just so boring I simply turned it off.
| 1
|
Just as predictable as any other netflix original, lots of good actors with bad directing and very empty plots, more of the same but it feels so cheap and amateur! Makes you roll your eyes every five minutes with the absolutely same cliche you could expect!
| 1
|
This is the weak middle part of a not so hot trilogy. "The Godfather" was great, this one was okay and "Part 3" was bad. "Part 2" is too long and often uninteresting. The scenes between Michael and Kay drag the movie to a halt. The storyline between Michael and brother Fredo plays out in an unbelievable way. Despite all the famous lines, the scenes don't ring true. Michael hates Fredo inside at the ball but wants to save him minutes later on the street. Only to hate him again when they get home. And they constantly refer to Marlon Brando. They must say "Papa" or "Pop" 40 times. Constantly reminding the audience that the first movie was better is not a good move. When I was a kid I wanted "The Towering Inferno" to win Best Picture because I thought it was a better movie. I still do. "Chinatown" should have won that year. Coppola's own "The Conversation" is also a lot better than "Part 2" and was a worthy candidate for the award.
| 6
|
In one of the best superhero sequels ever made, Tobey McGuire reprises his role as Peter Parker who is struggling with life's challenges, money, love and living and what's more he is losing his powers. And with more crime arising, Parker faces difficult choices concerning his personal life.
Breaking the opening weekend Box Office record, the Spider-man franchise grew wider and this 2004 sequel has been described as one of the best superhero sequels ever made, and I couldn't agree more.
With a much better opening to the first film, we are thrust straight into Parker's life as he tries to balance his job, his money and his university classes. Having many issues gives the film depth and is intriguing to watch each situation develop.
This film is similar to the first, with a focus upon dramatic issues such as his love for Mary Jane and the loss of his Uncle Ben. There is a slight feeling of repetition but in context it is understandable and gives the characters more emotion and understanding.
There is more action in this sequel, watch out for one of the best fantasy fight scenes in motion picture history, which so happens to be on a train. Excellent direction and nail biting close scenarios. There is always a question of realism but nevertheless that situation was simply outstanding.
The effects are great, as you would expect and much better than the first. I'm personally not a big fan of CGI but regardless this was special and was made so by Raimi's direction.
There are plenty of twists and turns in store and with the added action and more deep situations it makes the plot even more special.
Though the love scenes are questionable they aren't as corny as the previous films and are enjoyable to watch. The green Goblin was a much better villain than Dr Octopus and J.K Simmons is brilliant as the newspaper boss and overall, Spiderman 2 is my favourite superhero film of all time.
| 9
|
Just watched all 8 episodes it is highly recommended binge worthy TV. Should have gave it 10/10 really. Great Story, AmaZing Acting, well written Loved it from start to finish. All the characters bring so many different layers to such an amazing story
| 9
|
I don't know the writings so I can't compare them. Ready Player One the movie is a very standard and predictable story. It is imo also almost zero sci-fi but just fantasy. I guess it works for the young - because the movie/story is well constructed giving them the impression, the hero etc. that one could be me etc. and it "fakes" that the movie is about them and their lifestyle etc. pp. I was once (in my younger days) a hardcore gamer and spend many hours per day and year to master ONE game - to a certain degree. The notion that some super kids are best in many different style of games in a virtual reality is one of the more obvious things a real gamer can detect that both the writer and the guys making the movie have no idea about pro gaming at all.
Steven Spielberg plays the card of zeitgeist, like his last movie The Post. One could say it is a safe bet to get some applause in the media and from the millennials and such kind of an audience. The last movie of Mr. Spielberg I really like(d) is War of the Worlds from 2005. Since then 13 years have passed...
Like Ridley Scott Spielberg is another formerly titan of movie making lost in mediocrity, and he seems even not to be able to choose interesting stories anymore. Even the last Indiana Jones was just okayish and way from good. Another synchronicity with Ridley Scott who blasted his great Alien franchise with the last output into pieces (I liked Prometheus but Covenant is by far the weakest of all movies about our beloved alien and was a big disappointment to me).
Ready Player One - a fake on gaming, a fake on sci-fi, a fake on virtual reality (we won't jump around in our bedrooms playing in vr but sit laid back in a couch or lay on our beds and just do everything with our thoughts in a not so distant future. I take any bet.) Also from the technical point of view I wasn't very impressed by the CGI.
Okayish, if you got nothing else to do.
| 5
|
Pros - The acting, by some of the cast, was good.
Cons - In 2D, the graphics and real-life/CGI integration were not done well (for example real life stuff, like clothes, did not get dirty in the CGI jungle). I realize that the Navi are supposed to be gangly; but I do not think that their movements were supposed to be THAT disjointed. The overlays are rather obvious.
The plot was not done in original way. The story elements seemed like copy+paste from several other stories. The names of things were facepalm-worthy.
Most of the acting was over-the top and cliche'.
Most of the characters (including the main villain) had no character arc.
Several things seemed unrealistic (for this movie universe's rules).
I found it to be INCREDIBLY boring.
A plot device overlapped in a creepy way.
The hippie/tree hugger message was extremely heavy-handed. Just watch Fern Gully (at least you will get some comedy relief, and it is half as long).
| 2
|
I went into this excited. Everyone hyped it so much. A Barbie movie made for grown up girls who played with Barbie. So incredibly stupid. It had a really great cast. Margo Robbie nailed Barbie. Kate McKinnon nails weird Barbie. But lord is the plot in this movie LAME. I didn't feel empowered or like it supported a feminist message. It felt extremely whiny. My mom watch it with me and said this is awful can we turn it off. She also asked me why all the kens had the same body type but the women did not.
Plus they made Midge out to be this weird discontinued doll. But I had several midge dolls because they had red hair and I'm a red head.
Highly disappointed.
| 3
|
In this first part of the ending, Harry, Hermoine and Ron do the heavy lifting. They are alone, looking for answers without the help of other magicians like before. The toughest moments are really emotional, intense and tough to watch.
And maybe that's why some parts may get a bit boring here and there, because we barely have any other characters. The movie could've used more time for Voldemort's actions or the other heroic (secondary) characters.
Anyway, in the end, the story is well told, full of details that makes second viewing more rewarding and what it takes aways in "fun", it gives back in emotion.
| 8
|
A different kind of war film. Very little dialogue or character development, it just places you in the middle of the action, in several different locations, in the air, on the Dunkirk beach and on one of the many boats that sailed over there to pick up the 400,000 stranded British soldiers. There was no real 'feel' of there being that many small boats, though it must have been an armada. It's a very sonic film, the subwoofers are really put to test, thundering along in scenes where, it's not really needed. Still, an entertaining, and ultimately, quite moving 1 hr and 46 minutes. And Harry Stiles can ACT.
| 6
|
Horrible movie ! The worst I have ever seen ! So many boring scenes!! The worst cast in history ! This movie is seriously overhyped ! This is the worst movie I have ever seen ! Horrible cast ! It's a copy cat of the movie, Quiet place . Don't waste your time ! HORRIBLE BORING MOVIE
| 1
|
I've heard so many great things about this show so we finally watched and are truly baffled by the praise. Not one plot twist came as a surprise, burst out laughing at the big reveal in episode two, and the lead character is a complete bore - Robocop had more of a personality than David Budd. Though to be fair, anyone standing around swiveling their head like a barn owl while on the lookout for threats would be boring.
| 2
|
Inception makes the average moviegoer feel smart and I would have zero problem with that,unless fans weren't so extremely elitist and condescending. I DO get it...and neither love or hate it. Limited vocabulary but maybe a good read?
DiCaprio has reached such super-stardom that can only be compared with Stallone,Schwarzenegger and Will Smith. Meaning:No matter who stars alongside him,he's the only one who sells the film.Just like in Shutter Island,Inceptions trailer only mentions LEONARDO.DICAPRIO.
If Watanabe,Cotilliard,Murphy and the rest(Oscarwinners and Oscarnominees,come on) co-star,I might want to know. Studios,respect actors...and ON PAPER,the mix of actors intrigues.
Plotwise though,it's all about Mal.Nolan had all the time he wanted to create a caper that was provocative or involved fates of main characters,danger! Morally ambiguous maybe! Yet,planting the seed in a business-mans head that selling his fathers company is his own idea is the result. HOW PG and unpersonal can we get? No room for both a new concept,a bold plot and developed characters...? Nope.
Understand it could've been to get a mail-man to call in sick the next day,heist irrelevant. 80% of Inception evolves around the caper,still it merely becomes window dressing,a distraction from the core,the human heart that occasionally beats,being the relationship between Dom and his bad conscience in the shape of Cotilliards Mal.
All scenes involving her are superb,it's a nuanced performance worthy of an Oscarnomination. Mal is dangerous,sad,disturbed, beautiful and Very dead. One scene especially involving a ledge is great,heartbreaking cinema. That the person who's most alive and complex is deceased..Paradox...but a good hint at the misuse of actors.
Several actors could just've switched names,their characters don't have personalities. What did you do here,Christopher? They describe rules for the dreamworld,dream-extraction,describe what's happening at the moment, that's it.
When Swick casted Watanabe in The last samurai,he knew the screenplay matched the mans potential. Nolan has with Batman begins and Inception twice wasted his talent...Murphy? Think I rather see him type-casted as sophisticated sociopaths alá Red Eye then see him as a blank page.
Inception's the star and while a detailed construction, intentionally confusing and complex,you DO have to pay attention,complex does not equal intelligent. As you take the ride,things move fast and you're not allowed to break and examine. It's only when it's over you realize you were standing still all along.
You are cleverly manipulated into believing the story makes you think(Cause you understand what you saw.Not the same..)or that your mind discovers philosophical metaphors. That you are witnessing something deep is shoved down your throat but depth is mostly absent.
Sure,the film deserves the Oscars. Things sound great,look great. Buildings become bridges. An orgasm for the eyes. Pfisters camera-work here is great,very colorful,crisp,clean. Imaginative art direction. I dig Zimmers less-is-more score. In general the whole film's eye candy,perfect surface. The inside...?
1.Alright,WAY too much shooting and "violence" going on here, considering everyone's sound asleep on a plane and thoughts are murdered. Would've been more intriguing with psychological tension instead of train-crashes and explosions but lack of a REAL physical threat only manages to turn suspense into a dream as well.
Sleeping boy vs. thought in zero gravity is so pointless,the impressive CGI just confirms Nolans smug self-awareness of his competent,VISUAL execution and just cements the surface statement.
2. Limbo. Wouldn't a dream-extractors worst nightmare be LIMBO,wouldn't it come up in a conversation between professionals at some point probably? No...not even mentioned until drama occurs.
3.For the 5th time,a womans accidental death consumes a wealthy,white man between 30 and 35 with guilt that will define him and her role is again pivotal. It's getting old and predictable,I hope the issues are worked out by now.
4.Last scene. It defines and sums up Inceptions feeling of surface reaching for depth and jaw breaking response,artistic pretensions,strained complexity for the sake of complexity rather then genuinely clever.
Nolan in desperation wants to wrap it up so it leaves us scratching our heads... I was banging my head against the seat in front of me when the end credits rolled.
He leaves you with two options,no scenarios or reasons that make or should make you come up with an own conclusion. Far from a thinking mans thriller. One of the two is a joke used when referring to funny,lousy twists in B-thrillers. So...
No why or how,just IF...IF films were people,Nolans own Memento,The usual suspects or Fight Club would blush,look at 8.8 and put a pistol in their mouth when the words"Smart,thought-provoking thriller" puts Inception next door to them.
The ending insults us,a cop out. Definition of a writer not knowing neither how to quit while ahead or how a journey is gonna reach a classic destination worthy of the plots seemingly intricate layers and ambitions. Sooo...he passes the ball to you and washes his hands with 15 seconds to go,smart lad.
A picture this celebrated for being smart should hold up under a magnifying glass. It burns up without you even turning it towards the sun,man. This is an experiment and Nolans monster looks good,but at times,it comes close to the IQ of Dr.Frankensteins creation.
DiCaprio gives a solid and mature performance,Hardy makes the most of what little the script offers and gives Eames mannerisms,charisma and a sense of humor. Cotilliard is amazing like stated.
The rest could've been portrayed by Gary Busey,Eric Roberts and Lindsay Lohan...
Nolans 1st failure is a mix of beauty,superficial intelligence and posturing. Caught between a flawed,pretty entertaining film and a bad one. Mediocre becomes bad when it comes to this director....so shallow.
| 5
|
there was a joke in the movie about a guy changing his name (to something complicated) because he couldn't afford a license plate for his car ... i didn't get it, did anyone else? and also i am going to add ten lines of text to this letter because IMDb is stingy and they will not let me post unless i write a whole lot of pointless stuff. i think i min of like 5 lines would be okay, but 10? i mean thats kinda a lot. anyways let me know if you got this joke because i didn't and i hope someone else did because i did not understand what it was about. and well lets see, i enjoyed the movie, i think it was pretty sick when that guy put the other guy in the woodchipper, and to think that it is based on a true story!!
| 8
|
Not much of a review here but I had to. Last episode 2hrs 21minutes should have been an hour and a half. WAY drawn out, each character except Argyle having their own little moment. To me every season has played out pretty much the same: build up, build up, grand finale, next season set up, but I watched. I will probably watch season 5 too.
| 7
|
I am reminded that poignant and critical science fiction still holds a place in our society. No matter how advanced our world becomes I hope someone will always be holding a magnifying glass up to the people and technology that shape out daily lives. In the vein of Rod Serlings Twilight Zone, Black Mirror shows us a bleak impression of the future if we succumb to the immediate gratification of technology and cynicism. Each Black Mirror episode is it's own stand alone piece. I'm not going to do a breakdown of the episodes. They are all worth checking out. Just trust me when I say it's some of the best Sci-Fi I've seen in a long, long time. REAL Sci-Fi. There aren't any happy endings here. It's Beautiful, It's sad, and it's all probably going to happen.
Watch it, enjoy it, and be wary of the future.
| 8
|
Just like night at the museum movie, all the objects start to move at night and scare people. Movie is not scary at all. It's more like comedy.
| 4
|
I won't say much, me and my brother literally slept in the whole movie, we tried, had to leave sometime just to get the ending, so i'd say gajab tatti movie, highly overrated, tribute movies ke naam dhabba hai, please don't get me wrong, this is the worst i have seen.
| 1
|
Shockingly Un-entertaining and lacking of blood for a Tarantino film. There aren't any shocking twist or characters that steal the show; it's a slow paced grind of a film. I love his films but this one lacks the luster of an Inglorious Bastards, Django, Pulp Fiction, or even Hateful 8. It lacks suspense. I did not find myself rooting for any character. I hoped something truly intriguing would happened but the closest It came to that, was a fight scene with Brad Pitt's character on a movie set. I would not watch this one again.
| 6
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.