Review
stringlengths 6
10.3k
| Rating
int64 1
10
|
|---|---|
Anyone over with ryan's shtick? Remember when Jim Carrey got annoying as F with his over the top reactions? And Ryan is dragging that dead horse of his through his career. Do some Well Written Dramas, get some Emotion. So something that has Zero comedy in it.
Oh the Film, 90% Green screen, effects were 70% okay. You can tell, But it's is impressive in small regard. There is little development in other characters, got boring. Having cameo's in your movie doesn't make it good. Jodie Did passable in her character, could have used a bit more enthusiasm and range though, but she is British. Taika needs to stop acting, focus on directing, Seems like he's always playing a gay character, but that could be his accent.
| 3
|
This movie was definitely a trip like others mentioned, but one I would've walked out on if I wasn't with friends. The sheer amount of ridiculous and juvenile humor would've worked a lot better when that style of humor was popular in the early 2010s, but now it just seems too cheesy and annoying for my liking. The last act of the movie is definitely more enjoyable than the rest of it and the overall message was good, but I can't see why people thought this movie was one of the greatest of the decade. To each their own I suppose.
| 3
|
Wow... Michael Bay managed to create a totally unlikable Ryan Reynolds character. That's quite the feat! I didn't think that was possible.
| 1
|
In the Valley of Peace, Po the Dragon Warrior does battle with a new peacock villain Lord Shen who uses his new weapon to take over Gongman City. It's a canon and it threatens to make Kung Fu obsolete. Also Po must come to terms with his origins that haunts him with crippling flashbacks, and find inner peace. It is also needed to work out issues with his father Mr. Ping.
The Panda is as funny as ever. The whole gang is back. I love the adoption story with Mr. Ping. It's actually good emotional stuff. That part provides the heart. The action is better than ever. It's even exciting as well as exhilarating. That part provides the fun. And the comedy provides the joy of the franchise.
| 8
|
Creative, well-choreographed and funny, "Kung Fu Hustle" by Chinese/Cantonese director Stephen Chow was an international $100 million hit.
The pros: The pace and charm of the movie. The homage it makes to older martial arts flicks. The stylish and nice-looking scenes it's composed by.
The cons: It's not quite enough a story in itself to make me fully engaged. Rather, it's a collection of nice pictures and fighting scenes.
| 7
|
I admire what the Safdie bros have created. It is original and they stick fearlessly to their idea. Here comes the compliment ... the film reminds me of the Coen brothers or Tarantino ... but without the finesse. If you like raw, then Uncut Gems is for you. Who am I to comment? I couldn't create what they have and I am just viewing it; then I have the audacity to comment upon it. But that's the deal ... there is a custom by which people such as myself are self appointed critics and then I indulge myself by writing about such a movie. I have read a number of bona fide critic's reviews and I am amazed at how taken they are with it. Did I enjoy it? Well it filled 2 hours 15 minutes when I couldn't find anything else to watch. Is it a film that could appeal to my mentality? In theory it should. Did I find it believable? ... no. But then, that doesn't matter. Was I shocked by it? Well in a world of cartoons, I would say this is a shocking cartoonesque style of effort. Do I think that there is some latent genius lurking behind what is presented here? Sure do. Here is another compliment ... I can't slot this movie conveniently into a zone that I recognize ... but then a lot of movies are like that and originality in art is a high achievement. What can I say in closing? This movie is on the border of greatness but if I am honest about it, it will sit on the border in my mind and I will be left wondering if the Safdie brothers will create something in the future that transcends this effort? Let's hope so.
p.s. am I imagining things or did I see Martin Scorcese's name in the credits? From memory, doesn't he make really great movies that make sense, leave a lasting impression and always leave you wanting for more?
| 5
|
I loved this show.It needs more attention,I mean acting was good,story was awesome except repetiteve theme.MARVEL fans muat watch.
| 9
|
I expected so much from this movie but when i went to see it me and my friends were disappointed. The acting was not so good, the dialogues are very boring, the ending is the most boring ever. I understand that this movie was based on real events and it is not supposed to be entertaining or have an amazing storyline. I have to say though that the way this movie was filmed is indredible, everything looks very realistic and detailed. However, everything else to me was very disappointing. This movie is overhyped
| 6
|
There has been put a viewpoint by most critics that the film would be liked by only the fanatics of SRK. I beg to differ. Why? Because the film, by all means, is worth a watch by an average ordinary cine-goer. Only SRK haters will find unnecessary reasons to dislike it or perhaps, the loyal Salman fans. Inside the theater u could point out those loyal ones who did not leave an opportunity to laugh out loud every time Gaurav's character felt pain and agony coz it wasn't too unrealistically macho like how they see in a 'bhai' film.
But sticking to this film i would say there wasn't a scene in the movie which felt out of place or looked too unrealistic. Never for once would u question the implausibility of the chain of inter-connected events in the movie. Although. some cinematic liberty has been taken but that is avoidable.
You never feel bored and that is when there isn't a song in the film which otherwise, is often put in the movies to cover its weakness for a bad storyline. A lot of people are saying that Gaurav's character overshadowed Aryan's character but that's just Gaurav being a strong character as the film revolves around him but, go and see for yourself that SRK has put an equal effort and hard work in Aryan's role as well. Both leave an impact in the end. This is the first film in which i saw audience glued to their seats even when the film ended. i guess, they were anticipating something more. Such is impact the film had on them.
Its a thriller with some good amount of action where 2 roles are performed so well that sometimes u completely forget it is the same actor. The chase sequences deserve a big thumbs up. The action doesn't leave you dissatisfied and there could have been only that much action coz it isn't an action film.
It would be the first time where family audience are flocking to cinema theaters to see an action-thriller. Otherwise, its the usual song and over- the-top punch lines which lures the family audience. All because there was some degree of honesty in the film that is 'Fan'. Do watch it
| 8
|
Worst movie in the MCU. Straight up. This felt more like a video game level with no story...or it was all routine superhero stuff to set up the next better thing.
America is a cool character.
Wong is great But Dr. Strange was the one that was hard to buy. And that CGI eyeball...no one in that room felt like saying, "bro this looks like crap, can we figure out a better solution."
I don't need it to be an actual eye...do you? See, no one needs that youtube level special effects. Why don't you transition it into a hologram, or just have Strange Identify as a person with a third eye.
Scarlet Witch was pretty cool villian.
4/10, this movie now takes the bottom spot away from the first avenger and securely affirms...I suck.
| 4
|
It's like some high school students decided to make a spiderman play on theatre a cheesy underdeveloped story line a prank of cgi and green screen plot twist made by a three years old and characters written via predictive text
| 4
|
Too predictable, bad sci-fi storyline, the try to make it dense by putting day-to-day issues that normal people or immigrants fight with is very cheap, bad tasty and inoquous. The mother daugter issue/ wife/husband issue, etc. C'mon! The argumrnt is poor, childish, it has no concistency, it is not serious. In fact, it is just a panflet showing minotities and diference, because they are hot nowaday issues, without any movie idea.
It tries to speak about too many things and it has no idea or focus on no subject. It serms that it is enough to win an oscar award... Please bring good movies back, this is not cinema wse!
| 2
|
I loved episodes 1 through 3. Henry Cavill is a great Geralt, and does the role justice.
I want to give this an 8 based on the first 3 episodes, but then episode 4 and onwards is just such a mess. The time jumps are never introduced, so it seems an unruly, badly written mess. Sadly, this includes the story and directing onwards, which the characters doing absolute nonsense ridiculous cheap for no reason at the worst of times. Incredibly frustrating.
1-3 an 8. The rest a mixture of 2 to 4 (good cinematography and most of the acting keeps reasonably strong given the script written by a twelve - year - old). Total 4. I see no reason to watch a season 2 if there will be one, in fact, don't even bother watching past episode 3.
| 4
|
The 8 episode series is typical on lines of Anurag Basu and Vikramditya Motwani style. Dark and blood. Without getting into the story or hinting on the series I only have one question - Was the display of Nudity and explicit Sex scene were directors requirements or Netflix demand. There could have been references but absolutely no need for the actual scene in the series. The series would have been same even without such scene and would be more popular but there's no sensor board so how do such contents be not viewed by under 16? Sad that decent series had such unwarranted scene.
| 4
|
The movie just gives you goossebumbs on almost every scenes. It's very gripping and inspirational . It raises more respect for our brothers on the border our Indian army . Hatsoff to the man for bringing the movie at this level with his acting Vicky Kaushal has done a fabulous job . Thank you to the man behind this Aditya dhar for bringing this movie to us in such a great way it was just too good . U can't even find a mistake in the movie . It is a must watch movie for all the citizens they have to know how our soldiers have done such a great job. so guys go plsss goooo and watch this movie. THANK YOU ...!!!!
| 10
|
I know that I'm supposed to think that this is the best thing on tv in 2023. I don't. The performances of Pedro Pascal and Bella Ramsey are exceptional however. They raise this whole production considerably and they kept me watching until the end of season one when I would otherwise have lost interest a third of the way in. On the negative side even allowing for the fantastical storyline some of the plot twists are just a bit too much of a stretch with Joel at times as indestructible as Schwarzenegger's Terminator and there's occasional elements of the kind of gross violence that sent the Walking Dead down the rabbit hole from which it never recovered. In fairness there is much less of that here and it's balanced with a dialogue and storyline in between such events and with some tender sections along the way. In this regard Episode 3 is superbly done and is almost a standalone film within the series. There's also some accomplished cinematography. Overall Pascal and Ramsey are utterly believable in their roles and we don't doubt their evolving relationship as they proceed on their journey. That was enough to keep me engaged with this first season but I'm not convinced that I'll rush back in to watch if and when a second season emerges.
| 7
|
I'm not usually keen on giving such high scores, just look at my other reviews.But at the same time, this film had a lot of expectations and a lot to make up for. Avengers 2 was pretty boring, not funny and not very entertaining movie. Plus with Batman v Superman getting released before this, Captain America: Civil war had it tough. This movie probably doesn't deserve a solid 9, but it does deserve to stand out from other comic book movies, because it should be an example of how to correctly make a super hero movie. Captain America, had more Avengers then first two Avengers film put together. It showcased new characters and gave more back story to; Black Panther, Ant-man, Vision, Scarlet Witch and Spider-man. That is a lot of new super heroes to give screen time, considering you still have the big players like Captain America, Iron-man, War Machine, Black Widow, Hawk-eye, Winter Soldier and Falcon. This film does an excellent job at handling so many heroes, not the same thing can be said for Avengers 2 or Batman V Superman, which failed to keep you balanced between 3 heroes and 2 villains.
The Marketing on the film was great, i was really going in expecting to see a full civil war between Cap and Iron-man, but the way the did it in the film was pretty good, the whole build up of the two sides was really good, and the fight between all heroes was much awesome! Yes, it really was Awesome! with many heroes using their techniques and new skills or fight scenes.
Spider-man in this film was brilliant. I really hope Sony doesn't screw it up and continue to make him work at being a better franchise. He really did a great job at being the comic relief.
The story had few hiccups, but nothing to major, as it was overlooked by the bigger picture. Moments in the film, where you would go as a critic and say "That character would not make that decision, or he is to smart to think like that" but even that wasn't as bad as seeing Ultron lose to Avengers 2 or Batman being played the whole film in Batman v Superman.
Like i said, this film might not deserve a 9/10, but it gets from me because it does deliver what so many heroes film have failed to do.
| 9
|
PULP FICTIONS IS A RAUNCHY MOVIE THAT USES JUVENILE HUMOR, ITS NOT GOOD and heres why in ferris buerls big day off he is a epic gangster just like the characters in here, but ferris has heart and wit that allows him to escape it a titgh pinchn while in this movie these heartless "poeple' arent nice and its not good in. This movie is not as good as ferris buerlls big day off which is the best movie of all time and is way funnier but in this movie its just corny and STUPID iu liek ferris way more than "dan" and his gang of hitmen overall its not that funny not that cool and fertris buelrs big day off is way better.
| 2
|
Scorsese, DeNiro, Pacino, Pesci. Those who're rating this film as 10/10 are falling for the silk and gold of those names in a true Emperor's new clothes trick.
It's not a poor story, or lacking good performances, it just lacks any tension, drama, or entertainment ...... even if it were a pure documentary, it'd be closed out in two hours tops.
| 3
|
Don't have words to describe how inappropriate this show is to the topic of suicide. This show completely gives an OK to teenagers committing suicide everyday in America. This sets a horrible example to young kids watching this show, making it an acceptable problem and solution for teens combating depression every day. Making high school issues as an acceptable excuse to doing such a horrific act, and blaming other people for what they chose to do, is unbelievably and disgustingly unacceptable. There are so many people all over the world combating depression, and so many have a million worse reasons to commit suicide, but they chose not to everyday. Showcasing some American kid, combating life in high school, does not truly portray the seriousness of the issue of suicide and depression. This show makes a joke out of the topic, and it is repulsive.
| 1
|
It sounds harsh to give 4/10 to a movie that was the best and most impressive visual work of its time. I had never seen anything as astonishing at the time and this movie was a CGI landmark way ahead of its time. Why Cameron choose a flat lazy story arch with zero character building and no stakes to deliver it I will never know. The visuals were amazing, everything else was mediocre or worse. You can have a good story and characters in visually stunning films. Nolan did so in Interstellar f.x.
| 4
|
Saw this film in theaters and can feel how slappy and cheesy it was...Then I saw The Lighthouse and THAT film had an actual impact and was more enteirtaining than this in the Cinema. The first two Annabelle films were hardcore. This was childish, Disney stuff.
| 6
|
Homelander is the show. Butcher, Hughie and the Deep are the only other watchable characters. Every other character is just filler garbage. Frenchie and Kimiko are absolutely the worst thing about the show. Forced wokeness keeps it from being a great show.
| 1
|
Hmm i am going to keep this short and sweet, this is way overrated, ir's not great and it's not bad.. however the 2 or so hours felt like 7 hours after watching this.
Now i watch movies constantly, i even find myself quite intelligent around films etc But this film is way, way overrated.. the best bits of the film was actually believe it or not the drama sides of things.. the story line was way over board and at times i felt like going to sleep with boredom. However this being said the acting was good and the stunts etc Just like Batman another overrated piece of work.. maybe if i watch a second time it might be different.
All i can say is go and see it if there's nothing else worth watching, Also don't watch it if you don't understand films as you won't understand this. And don't watch it because you see a high 9.2 rating and loads of overrated comments on here ..
Movie 7 out of '10
| 7
|
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
May be I expected too much from this movie, which was supposed to "change the way I see things". Well, it did not change anything, and certainly not the way I look at things. May be it changed the way I look at people who think this is the best movie ever made.
It's long, tedious, they go through layers after layers, why, we do not really know. The characters are numerous, flat, (some may argue that this is a dream so they are supposed to be flat), but strangely enough they are quite consistent, they never change, which is not consistent at least with my dreams.
And if you ask people why this movie is so fascinating and "complex", you might end up with the following conversation:
"it can not be explained with words, it's a story about a guy who gather a team to go through different layer of dreams to alter, blah."
"Yes, I got that and?"
"But I can't tell you the whole plot, I might spoil it"
"I saw it, try me."
"Euh, his wife blah blah... about the dream thing, life, death, redemption, there are so many themes in this movie"
"And?"
"Euh, I don't know, you need to think."
"Ah..."
I guess many people confuse complexity and redundancy. These guys just go through layers and layers of dreams, wrapped non-sense pseudo-scientific verbiage. Than he sees his wife again and again, and "kicks" back again and again, fights again bad guys again and again. And what? This is not complex, this is redundant and boring!
Many people mentioned to me that there was a trick at the end of the movie... Actually, the end is a kind of pale copy of Orange Clockwork ending, and you can expect the trick from the beginning. Orange clockwork, the hurt locker, usual suspect, this is how you end a movie, and I did not see it coming from the first 15 minutes of the movie.
In the category "the director tries to drive you crazy", Donnie Darko, Mulholland drive and, if we stick to Nolan universe, Memento gets my vote, not Inception. Or go watch Matrix again, or Dark city, or whatever movie you want to, that lasts less than 2 hours.
Bottom line, I was bored during the projection, and that's one of the worst movie I've ever seen. 2 points because I did not leave (which makes it a better movie than Titanic to me).
| 2
|
Everything is fine but It is definitely not a fantasy show guys.
| 5
|
The episodes have progressively gotten better as the show has continued.
No doubt the animation for each episode and creativity in the storylines are amazing. And with only 30 minutes, it's hard to capture everything in order for the episode to be amazing. That's why the pacing may seem rushed for some episodes. But at the same time, each episode is unpredictable and not repetitive of any of the other ones.
Maybe for season 2 they can make it longer so they can flush out characters and the story mode.
| 9
|
First of all, I have to say - all the 1s and 2s, as well as all the 10s, is a sign of dishonest people trying to counterbalance those that dishonestly like/dislike the show....... You people are all ruining culture, both sides of the equation, and need to grow up, whatever your age.
Rant over, now to the review:
I'm an avid fantasy fan, I read George R.R. Martin way before the show (which I loved) got made, I've read many other fantasy writers through the years, and watched many failed - and a few successful - attempts at the genre, in both movies and on TV.
Just so you understand, that I am not a novice to the genre.
However, I have absolutely no prior knowledge to "The Witcher", having neither read the books nor played the game.
That particular writer sort of passed me by.
To compare with GoT is rather obvious, and in many respects, The Witcher is almost as good. The fights are great, the costumes are great, the scenery is great (albeit missing the oppulence and attention to detail of GoT), the monsters are good (though more cartoonish and clearly lower budget than GoT).
So far so good, we are en route to a solid 8.
However..... where the director has totally failed his audience (and where GoT really succeeded in season 1), is that GoT educated us all on the history, geography and politics of the world we were supposed to lose ourselves in.
That is completely missing from The Witcher.
Instead, you spend the first half of the season, trying to make sense of a world you have zero prior knowledge of, and is barely explained anything about, while dealing with a bunch of weird jumps in the time line, that seem to have very little actual purpose to the story, except to add to the confusion.
Having completed Season 1, I still have no idea how the continent looks, what countries are there, where they are situated, how they differ culturally - nor do I have any sort of back story, to explain how this whole world landed in this situation, or what an "Witcher" actually is.
It's like the director thinks, that the interesting thing to us the viewers, is to speculate on what the back story of The Witcher actually is...... like it was some sort of "fantasy mystery story", but set in a world we are given absolutely zero knowledge of - making it impossible to guess anyway.
That totally misses the mark - just tell us who these people are, and get on with telling a great story, while we can all understand what is going on - and why it is going on.
Some simple graphics/maps and a narrator giving us a bit of "historical" (yes, I know it is fantasy) background - and some graphics (even some arbitrary fantasy dates) denoting a change in time line - and this show would have left me with a totally different - and much more positive feeling.
Now it gets a 6, with potential for growth, if they fix the logical issues for season 2, because the basic premise of the show and the acting of the main cast, is actually pretty great, especially Anya Chalotra playing Yennefer is a great find, and clearly destined for stardom.
| 6
|
Extremely disappointed. All you need is the first and last 45 minutes. The middle 2 hours just DRAAAAAG. De Niro and Pesci were outstanding, but Pacino was surprisingly awful. Or maybe the part was awful.
| 3
|
Cannot understand how Sam rockwell received an oscar for this, I know no one is taking oscars serious anymore but still he is wooden and can't act to save his life. Coming to the story, this is a poor film with an idea that the director thinks is greatest ever, not. The storyline is weak and inconclusive and it does not even know where it was going. Don't bother watching this and waste your time please!
| 4
|
I love "big" action comedies, but I just watched the movie on Netflix, and it's just a poorly made movie. It's a "Bay" movie so you get all the expected cheesy attempts at playing on our emotions, big shootouts and the big explosions. You also get is a poorly written script, that does not give the actors anything meaningful to say. The few attempts at comedy are so bad. What sticks out the most is the poor editing, with so many continuity mistakes in the actions scenes. This is apparently what you get from Hollywood for 150 million US dollars. According to Wikipedia, Netflix wants this to be a new action franchise. A tip: drop the sloppy and disinterested writers, editors and producers and get someone that is actually interested in their job, and it it might actually work.
| 3
|
There are two sides to everybody, and one of our favorite heroes is no different. Sometimes characters need a beat down in most ways in order to truly grow and become their best, and this is Spider-Man at his best indeed. New kinds of action scenes, a fascinating villain, and emotional complexity is what Spider-Man 2 is all about!
| 10
|
Pilot has to be one of the most tedious things to watch. The pacing is bad, the acting is wooden and the characters all dislike each other.
The passive aggressive bitching and shots at each other makes this even harder to watch. For a show about a family trying to survive their pettiness to each other seems so over the top and pointless.
Also the question of Judy still remains, who's kid is she and why is this completely ignored as if there is nothing to discuss? Wouldn't this been a good time to maybe talk about adoption or what had happened before? It's possible the first guy left because the mother is an overbearing passive aggressive wet blanket of a person.
I don't get all the 10 star ratings, the whole thing is mediocre even if you like the show. Surely people have some semblance of what good acting is right? At least be objective.
| 2
|
Unfortunately Netflix completely destroyed that beautiful masterpiece made by Sapkowski. The plot did not engage me at all. Directing, cinematography, screenplay - all of those issues are misunderstandings. Characters do not have any emotional connection, whole world is so flatten.
By the way - in the second episode od season 2 (around 13th minute) they have broken the 180 degrees rule - one of the basics of cinematography work. It just shows how amateur this show is.
The advantages are definitely acting of Henry Cavill and VFX.
| 4
|
It's a crazy show I give you that. The soundtrack is enjoyable. The actors and their performances are nothing short of perfect. Their chemistry together starts of weird but you will end up loving these psychos and their pairing. Yes, it's also a romance. It's only 8 episodes with 25 minutes, quite shorter compared to your usual 45-1hr shows. If you can stomach its dark themes, give it a go. It's binge worthy. I wouldn't recommend it to everyone though as is more suitable with the teens of this decade.
| 9
|
This is probably one of the most bittersweet pictures I've seen. Bitter, because I always felt it's a rather bleak and disturbing affair, but rendered sweet thanks to the colorful group of characters and their amusing banter (which is nicely emphasized with all those accents they have there, don'tcha know?). Parts of this film are pretty amusing, but parts of it are pretty sad. The whole affair is a funny-but-sad case.
This story is pieced together from a couple of real-life cases, but populated with fictional characters. It's a pretty simple set-up: a man arranges to have his own wife kidnapped, hoping to weasel money from her father in the form of a ransom. What should be a simple and painless situation becomes a total disaster, because nearly every character thinks they know what they're doing and they think they're so hot, but they're all really inept. A series of mishaps and bad decisions causes a cascade of murders and a rather tragic outcome. Well, heck, the final scene is one of the bloodiest and messed-up things conceivable. As crazy and funny as it is to see things deteriorate over stupid mistakes, it is a sobering reflection on crime, greed, and humanity overall. I think the cop sums it up well at the end, for after running through the situation, she asks, "and for what? For a little bit of money. There's more to life than a little money, ya know. Dontcha know that?" All that being said, I feel the story does take one too many random tangents. A lot of screen time is spent on the cop's personal life, which never really has much relevance to the case. I suppose it's perfect for showing a little more humanity on screen, and to contrast directly with the other guy's family. However, I do believe these extraneous scenes slow down the pacing a lot, and sidetracks from the main story.
This film has good, straightforward photography and editing. Acting is effectively perfect from the whole cast, and the writing is good. This production uses very real-looking sets, props, costumes, and locales. Carter Burwell's music score is haunting, dramatic, and beautiful all at once.
This film has garnered its share of acclaim for darn good reasons. I always believed it could be a tighter film, but it is still well worth seeing for its great cast, its distinctive dialogue (complete with accents), and its ability to instill feelings of amusement and sorrow.
Recommended.
4/5 (Entertainment: Good | Story: Good | Film: Very Good)
| 8
|
Session 2 is boring, Refrigerated Stake at best, and Snooze Fest at worst. Voice acting is terrible, they can't bring back most of the old cast. Animation is Kaku, looks like some chars lack joint points and facial polygons, whoever animates characters needs to go back to school because those running animations are not even close to human-like.
Cinematography... the best I can say is: production line. I liked maybe 2-3 shots in the whole s2.
Frequent "mouse-mandated" references are also tiresome.
It's character-breaking, contradictory to itself, and makes you not care for whatever plot they throw in there.
Also, the amount of 8-10 star ratings here is disturbing.
Edit: Also, cringe.
| 3
|
It is Noir, German Expressionism, Drama, Documentary and Comedy all in one film. . Save Casablanca, I can't think of another film that embodies so many genres. Like any great film Amsterdam needs to be screened over and over. (this was number 5 for me) I suspect many of the negative reviews here reflect the attitudes that have resurfaced in the last decade or so in America today. Let's be frank, this film was directed toward them. Rarely do you see so many 10's and 1's for the same film on this platform. That's an indication some of the reviews are purely political. I also suspect many of the middle of the road reviews reflect moviegoers who were honestly lured to see Amsterdam by the list of stars, who played characters they were not accustomed to see them portray. This movie is eclectic, existential and timely. Kudos to the people who backed this film financially. Like The Oxbow Incident, this film needed to be made.
| 10
|
This film has to be the worst I have ever seen. it has no storyline and makes fun of the Japanese (the jokes aren't even funny). It's got great actors in it but the film isn't any good. no offence to some of the other comments but I completely disagree with them that the film is good, i think it is rubbish. my dad bought it home from the DVD rental shop because he had heard good reviews. we sat there watching it in disbelief that a film without a storyline could get a good review. Are movie critics really reviewing for the public or for professionals in the business? My friends also agree that it is the worst film ever and I don't know anyone that thinks it is good. It is EXTREMELY boring and I don't recommend anyone should watch it.
| 1
|
Season 1: Very well made, acted and written and I love it
Season 2: Sorcery, magic and time travel, so what's not to love
Season 3: The level of political correctness and "woke non-values" is so high that I simply couldn't watch beyond episode 3.
Sorry, but I simply cannot watch woke shows. So I'll leave this story unfinished and the rating goes down from 10 stars to a mediocre 6 (I am almost tempted to decrease it even more).
| 6
|
When it come to the Tick its hard for me to hear anyone's voice but Patrick Warburton even though he was only the tick for 8 TV episodes. I loved the cartoon and the since the TV series that could have been something with an actual budget, Mr Warburton is the Tick. Now I do like this new guy, I really liked him as Aldo in Spy. They really need to keep this toon-ish and not try and get to serious with it. It has potential, but I think the Tick costume is terrible and Arthur's suit is grey? Yuck. If we get to see people like the Sewer Urchin, and the Human Bullet, crusading chameleon, American Maid, and Defladurmause/Batmanuel and Villains like the Midnight Bomber which bombs at midnight, and Dinosaur Neil it may really get a following. I am willing to stick around and see how it goes so far.
| 7
|
Anyone that's been following this case for years will know what an awful representation Amanda Sigfreid has given to the actual E. Holmes. She was a cold, calculated, sociopath. This "documentary" is trying to paint her as a poor little, badly treated girl. Pathetic.
Some of the positive reviews are shocking, and actually not believable, luckily these people weren't a part of the jury that found her GUILTY of conspiracy and wired fraud.
If you want to watch a real documentary on this person, with her coworkers thoughts on it all, and the investors she bilked, watch the HBO doc by famed director/documentarian Alex Gibney, "The Inventor: Out for blood in Silicon Valley."
| 7
|
I read the book as a teenager and was so captivated by world of A Discovery of Witches, and so when I heard there's going to be a TV adaptation, I was ecstatic.
The series fulfilled all my expectations. It's brilliantly done! The fact that it's science, history, and magic fully intertwined makes for a very wholesome story. I so want the story to be true irl (that's how engaging the story is!).
The series takes its time to build the foundation of the story, and then takes you on a whirlwind of mystery and magic.
On top of that, there are some very beautiful cinematography in the series. The sets (or actual location?) are beautiful. It's dark and alluring. It's a clash of the old and traditional with the modern and carefree.
I can't wait for the new season!
| 9
|
The first Marvel series for Disney+ is built on a fascinating concept but the closer it draws to MCU reality, the more turgid it becomes. The rich tropey world that WandaVision builds out of satirical sitcom interpretations is layered, clever and brilliantly realised but rather shows up the flat grey melodrama of the MCU aesthetic the more the latter intrudes. Despite the tonal disparity, that the strange Pleasantville/Truman Show premise was even greenlit at all is a minor miracle and it's a bold beginning to the corporation's plush filmic TV canon. It's glorious to see Bettany and Olsen flex their considerable dramatic muscles and both of them do a superlative job of grounding the show, whether in full epic comic movie mode or in whichever sitcom era they reside.
There's a rich supporting cast too and Hahn and Peters throw in spirited turns - the MCU comic reliefs seem a little snarky and superfluous in comparison, prized awkwardly out of their respective contexts but the whole strange ensemble is quite compelling. Also Photon was there as well. The pacing of WandaVision is quite uneven with a two-steps-forward-one-step-back approach born out of an obviously sincere but rather patronising desire to make sure the broadest possible audience is keeping track of the concept. It's the difficult tonal marriage of these two (somewhat conflicting) desires that prevents it from building too successfully on the promise of the first few unsettling installments and the flashy grand finale is somewhat of a grey superhero squib.
So certainly not bad but here's hoping the next Disney+ series is a bit more small-screen minded in terms of week-to-week episodic pacing, which would give the wider cast and entire series a bit more room to breathe naturally. What they sacrificed for consistency in the earlier parts was made up for by some truly subversive television which I wasn't expecting at all - so absolutely fair play to them for that and Make Mine Marvel always.
| 7
|
Yet another shallow hollywood product, devoid of any real history. The props and budget are great, but thats about it. Anyone with any knowledge about the war, or even half a brain would struggle to watch this one. Avoid this garbage.
| 1
|
Is it just me, or is Robert DeNiro once again portraying the mindless and aging FBI honcho Robert Mueller from SNL fame in this lengthy biographical film????? He sure runs like a 76 year old man so why no stunt double for DeNiro?
Pacino isn't playing Jimmy Hoffa. Every time he opens his loud mouth, Al Pacino is just playing himself. In fact a VERY OLD looking 79 year old over-the-hill version of Al Pacino. Sad. Terribly sad. Jimmy Hoffa is rolling over in his grave or he is breaking through 20 tons of concrete to stop a has been like Pacino ruin his reputation.
Mrs. Shullivan and I were anticipating another long awaited Martin Scorsese 1960's-1970's period masterpiece crime film, but instead what we disappointedly sat through was an over-hyped, (too) lengthy quasi biography on just one of the many here say storylines on the 1975 sudden and mysterious disappearance of former union Teamster President Jimmy Hoffa.
This film version of the missing Jimmy Hoffa focuses on three main characters, Hoffa played by Al Pacino, mob boss Russell Bufalino played by Joe Pesci, and the underling stuck in the middle of Hoffa and Bufalino, teamster labour leader Frank Sheeran, played by Robert DeNiro.
THE GOOD: Make no mistake, without actor Joe Pesci's strong but silent type mobster boss performance this film would have been most likely rated nothing more than a Grade B film with more than half of the finished product still sitting on the cutting room floor. Unlike the previous Scorsese directed mob films where Joe Pesci plays a raging out of control mobster maniac, in this biographical film Pesci plays a silent, very controlled, smart and resourceful mobster fixer who doesn't say much, but when he does, you better listen. I felt Pesci's strong performance and especially his one-on-one interactions with his underling Frank Sheeran kept the flame from going out on this otherwise forgettable and over rated film. Pesci played a similar role (crime boss) in the 1993 film, one of my all time favorite crime films, "A Bronx Tale", which also co-starred Robert DeNiro and Chazz Palminteri.
THE BAD: Why did Scorsese have the now 76 year old DeNiro and the now 79 year old Pacino play their respective characters Frank Sheeran (DeNiro) and Jimmy Hoffa (Pacino) from their early days in the 1960's through to the year Sheeran actually died of cancer in 2003? The film would have transitioned much better through the five (5) decades of this biographical story line if two different actors had played a younger version of Frank Sheeran and Jimmy Hoffa. Off the top of my head I could see Milo Ventimiglia playing the younger Frank Sheeran and Michael Chiklis playing the younger Jimmy Hoffa during the 1960's scenes and then transitioning to the (past their freshness date) Robert DeNiro and Al Pacino playing the much older versions of their characters.
THE UGLY: The film it's way too loooooong and boring. I understand that NetFlix has to fill in 24 hours per day for their millions of subscribers but to just fill in with extended and continuous chatty scenes that were just wasted minutes as were the smoke breaks alongside the highways and motels, ENOUGH ALREADY!
Sadly, I rate it a dismal 2 out of 10. Badda Bing! Badda BUST!
| 2
|
No-one was forthcoming about OOTP and HBP. They have succeeded in the infamous Potter manoeuvre of neither being wildly brilliant or atrociously laughable, but always being huge box office phenomenon's that have now outdone the likes of Star Wars, so they must have been doing something right, right?
Well other than being the best franchise rights attained by Warner Bros. for being such a successful series, they always were inviting to people new to the experience, specifically those who hadn't read the books. The problem? The people who are fans of the book (including your dear critic) are always spotting the missing scenes, the awkward relationships - that aren't supposed to be awkward and the rare but recent addition of scenes that had as much logic and point behind them as singing into a turned on Hoover nozzle.
So being the best book, (arguably) the routinely depression encased within the restriction Hogwarts has lifted, as has the more customary check list. Big castle, problem, another problem, acting sad, kissing, wand walloping, morning, end. For once the relationships, like the plot, aren't constraint to the walls of Hogwarts, they are free at last.
Though Yates has been irksomely juggling the same premise for two films too long he makes up by, fi-na-le being faithful through the decision to cleanly cut the film in two. He also includes additional scenes (wait for it) that aren't unlike the characters motivations; HBP had the attack of the Burrow scene with no motivation from Death Eaters what so ever. In Deathly Hallows there are emotional additions that aren't hosted in a sulky and heavy atmosphere, such as when Harry is trying to console Hermione.
The film also amplifies its standard of being funny, something which the books only mildly covered as a quick disengagement from the 'fun'. And for the first time in history, when the newly instated Minister of Magic quotes: "These are dark times, there is no denying." the theme turned cliché of diluting the lighting for the gazillionth time so it's darker therefore 'more rugged and scary' - lives up to its sense of impending doom, without having the usual buzz of hopeful expectancy followed by obvious disappointment - like the lottery always does.
It's quiet easy to be bitter about the fact the best director, Alfonso Cuaron, never got the chance to make another instalment that could have established a new high point of the relatively indistinguishable mountain but saying that, Yates would never have got the chance to prove he can make one of the best additions to the series, that wasn't even close to being the money-grabbing, giant tease it could have been. If Part II can be this enjoyable to all audiences, then the Potter finale will rouse as much love as when he was first seen branded with his slogan scar and if not, it would at least be well-deserved to see Part I make the top 250.
| 8
|
I had very high expectations of this show (and I still do) and the first episode certainly didn't disappoint.
It managed to interest the viewers, it introduced us it had funny moments, it even made some of us cry. It introduced new characters in a way we are already ready to accept them. It proved to us that just because Loki didn't go through the whole character development he had in the movies, he's still just as vulnerable and just as morally confused and not just a villain.
Above all that, the cinematography and the aesthetic are wonderful.
Looking forward to see what the next episode brings!
| 8
|
The answer is very plain and simple: it was a think piece from start to finish and it was brilliant. Young people automatically eschew a film if isn't packed with moronic action from start to finish. The idiot who called it torture porn cries when he chips a nail. The one scene that is truly brutal and chilling is nothing compared to the shower scene in "Eastern Promises" with Viggo Mortenson and that was an exceptionally brilliant film as well. You will never see the end you get in this one coming. It was amazing. The complaints about Jennifer Lawrence's accent is the director's fault, not hers, if there is a flaw. For some reason her accent is more pronounced in some scenes and less in others. It did not detract from the gritty story and JL's tough yet vulnerable and loving character. She was the jewel in this film, but all the actors were outstanding. If there is one thing that was off-putting just as with most recent films of this genre, it is the lousy mood lighting. It always appears dark, dingy, and dull. I long for the days of thrillers like Hitchcock's that gave us brilliant color inside and outside, day and night with real film. They let all the beautiful color show and bolster the film. The darker scenes brought moodiness but in this film there is little contrast. All these films you cannot see very well are hurt by flat, colorless cinematography. Whatever it does for the feel of the location, it takes away from the reality and enjoyment. Still, a very plausible and gripping story and film.
| 10
|
Watch all three episodes so far. It was both good and bad. The good part is they try to show a timeline of all the events and experiences that Elizabeth Holmes went through starting as a little girl and what had inspired her, to how she ended up meeting all those people in her life, coming up with her idea of a revolutionary product, raising all that money and becoming the CEO of Theranos. For someone who has been following this story, there are many bits and pieces we knew, but this seemed to pull it all together well. I liked that aspect of it, as very few other shows on this topic have captured that. The bad part is that the lead Amanda Seyfried does not come across as Elizabeth Holmes well. She seems very emotional and flaky, unlike the real Elizabeth Holmes, and it's hard to imagine how she convinced so many very sophisticated people to finance and back her. And also, some of the events and timelines may have been exaggerated and mixed up to make her a sympathetic character. Specially how her 'mean old boy friend' was dominating and controlling her when nearly all accounts show that he was quite infatuated with her, and was putting up his own money in trying to help her with her problems. If anything, it was she who used him. Nonetheless it is enjoyable and the fact that all this is based on a true story makes it quite interesting to watch.
| 7
|
Imagine a film where you take characters who were incredibly well developed in the prequel, learned hard lessons and responsibility, and were actually likeable. Then spend a few hours tearing all that apart. Then light the likeable parts of the characters on fire and make one of them an anarcho-socialist. Mix it all together with a few cliches and you have this disaster piece that manages to disappoint at all but the visual stage. How this tripe was greenlit is beyond me and I deeply regret the time and money lost in viewing it.
Save yourself the time and frustration of seeing into the spider verse get the redemption arc flipped and miles Morales willing to burn the world.
| 2
|
It's not awful, but it does certainly not deserve this kind of praise. Half of the show consists on sex scenes and the other half is absolute nonsense. The choices the characters make are utterly ridiculous. They are portrayed as deeply inlove but they are adamant on destroying their relationship for some reason whenever things are finally going well. A story about star cross lovers works well when they are separated by circumstances OTHER THAN THEMSELVES.
| 6
|
The show is about two teenagers heading on the independent quest of escaping their boring lives to the "great" unknown. The show gives great curiosity to the viewer and it's definitely well-made with some bold picture attempts. Without a doubt I liked it, the only thing that bugs me is the question of why did they do a series instead of a movie. It would definitely draw more people to watch it (in my opinion). But let's leave that question aside and enjoy the episodes.
I give it 9/10 very nices.
| 9
|
Every Indian shall watch this movie. Proud to he Indian under strong leadership of Modi who has respected and elevated Josh of our armed forces.
| 10
|
What The Hell?!
This Series Was Too Epic!!!!!!
Damn good storytelling mindblowing characters developing epic visuals AVATAR THE LAST AIRBENDER is the best tv show of all time.
| 10
|
SPIDER-MAN was a highly entertaining film with a serious tone for the most part. Since it was anyways an origin story, that was great. And then came SPIDER-MAN 2, which successfully outdid the first part and cemented itself as one of the best superhero films in the history of world cinema. It's a film which takes the origin story further to an all new level and the result is an intense, emotional, occasionally funny, action packed and highly entertaining superhero blockbuster.
SPIDER-MAN 2 has much better humour than the first one. The film connects and resonates emotionally so well that you end up completely rooting for Peter Parker. His failure in personal as well as professional life proves to be touching and even at times, so heartbreaking that you wish to cry along with him. Tobey Maguire's performance is very natural and full of depth. He never stops impressing as Spidey, and portrays him as realistically as possible. Kirsten Dunst does a good job as in the first part, while James Franco impresses even more with a new layer added to his character. And then we have J.K. Simmons whose comic timing evokes loud laughter. But the man who leaves a remarkable impact is Alfred Molina, whose portrayal of Dr. Octopus is phenomenally groundbreaking and entertaining.
What's also impressive is that not only Spider-Man, but Dr. Octopus too proves to be a highly entertaining and memorable character. Then we have world class visual effects for which it even won an Oscar, highly exhilarating action sequences, especially that train sequence, and a lot of crowd-pleasing moments sprinkled throughout the film. The message of great powers and great responsibilities continues to resonate throughout the film.
And then we have the result: a highly entertaining action film which proves to be the epitome of superhero cinema.
| 10
|
Finally these two movies have started changing this dictator propaganda in film industry. Finally girls in movie has nothing to do with remove clothes or kisses. Utilizing character not someones horniness on mass scale. Abhi sab line or aayenge.
| 10
|
So boring childish overrated.
This for kids is Ok but its so predictable and silly. Totally overrated.
I found it so boring and silly.
Bad acting bad cinematography and bad dialogue.
| 1
|
Total disappointment. After so many good reviews, I went to this with high expectations and it didn't deliver at all.
90% of the jokes didn't land; Ryan Reynolds is the same as in every other film, nothing special, nothing new; I'm still trying to find out that great actress called Jodie Comer, as - again - I find her really unnatural and forced; Lil Rel Howery looks like a male version of Tiffany Haddish, doing the black role white people like; a very childish approach with a pathetic romance and really lame situations...
Well, at least I liked the world created, most of the effects and Taika's role. Unfortunately, I think that's all. Ah, Dude was funny. A bit.
| 4
|
Well i watched this movie with half heart as my friends want to see it.Though i like the movies of Anurag kashyap.I am not impressed by its trailers.But when i watched this movie in theatre first thing which was shocking was the theatre was houseful.I thought only me n my friends will be there in theatre but it made me wrong. Second thing was the acting of not only the main lead Manoj bajpai but all other actors acted superbly.Even the smallest characters did justice to their characters. The story was awesome it contains action,humour and sex.Slangs made the movie more humorous to watch.If you liked Ishqiya I think you will like this more than the previous song.OOoo womaniya what a lyrics.
| 7
|
"Why do we need a war to solve a problem". The question that will pop up in your while watching the Avengers follow-up. Captain America:Civil War was entertaining with high-class 3D effects and stunning CGI along with riveting performances which turned out to be a solid follow-up to the Avenger series.
As the new Superhero Registration Act is proposed by the United Nations which lays out the plans to deploy Super-heroes only when required. This political interference by the government causes the rift between two good friends – Captain America, who believes that Super-hero should be have freedom to act and "not obey order", and Iron Man who believes that Super-heroes should be answerable to a neutral body based on their actions.
It would have been really challenging for Russo brothers, Anthony Russo and Joe Russo, directors of Captain America : Winter Soldier to make a film by assembling all the superheroes in one flick but to my surprise they did a fantastic job and turned the comic-story into a must-see film. Of course, if you would have followed their original parts then this will be easy to continue. The differences between the characters has been portrayed ecstatically. 1st half boast of some path- breaking action sequences. The opening fight scene with Scarlett Johannson's Black Widow is pretty impressive, the introduction of each super- hero character has laid out accurately and fight scenes will keep you engaged. Second half loses the steam with so many stories interwoven under the same umbrella.
Couple of scenes that easily stands out are conversation between Captain America and Iron man, the new characters like Black Panther and Ant-Man are highly likable. But the most impressive is the introduction of Spider-man which is played by a Tom Holland. Climax fighting scene is well executed. Screenplay is effective along with punching dialogues. Cinematography is enthralling. The CGI is magnificent with thrilling visual effects.
On the flip side , any superhero movie is supported by electrifying background which is clearly missing here. Nevertheless, it is compensated by powerful performances by rest of the starcast especially. Robert Downey Jr who clearly stands out in his portrayal of Ironman and witty one- liners. The supremely talented actor goes deep inside a broken super-hero character who is left by his girlfriend. Chris Evans emotes better compared to the previous series of Captain America as if it is tailor-made for him. Scarlette Johanson does what she is best at – kick some ass. Paul Rudd will surprise you as Ant- Man.
Overall, Captain America:Civil War is a solid follow-up to the Avenger series and nice sequel to Captain America films. Go for it. Excellent 4/5
– Ketan Gupta
| 9
|
This movie was given way too much credit. It was not as good as people said it was. The only good thing about it was Heath Ledger. This was the best performance of his tragically short life. He was amazing as the Joker, and extremely frightening. The rest of the movie was a waste of my time, though. The other actors were sub par, and the story was unoriginal. That really annoyed me because of how people were RAVING about it. This movie is not worth your time, don't listen to the people saying 'Oh, The Dark Knight is great, it's the best movie ever', because that is not true. I actually don't know if I was watching the same movie as those people, as the movie I saw was total garbage, almost but not quite saved by one absolutely stellar performance.
| 4
|
As most other reviewers have said something about the lackluster plot I wont say anything about that. But what I will say is this;
The fight scenes were very disappointing. Where other marvel movies have had fast pace, action packed and well written action scenes, Black Panther did not have those at all. It almost looks like the actors and choreographers just did not have enough time to go through the fight scenes as they should've, and decided to make the moves slower and easier to perform.
For me, being a person who really likes a well written action scene ( for example I love the John Wick style of action scene) this was a really big letdown.
| 4
|
The best tv series i have ever watched. An awesome concept, the seasons are awesome..must watch tv series. Sherlock Rocks. The actors are awesome, this is a tv series that will be remembered forever!!!
| 7
|
What a movie, IT'S the best Adult comedy drama movie in Bollywood till now.Just fell in luv with this movie.
| 10
|
It's been my assumption that directing a movie must be a pain in the tuchus. Most new or unknown Directors lack the freedom to create a film from their mind's eye, because first the Producers believe in simple formulas to make a movie "good", Directors don't generally know the history of their subject matter (if it is a film about an already developed character), then of course the actors need direction, so much so that you must be able to communicate your wants effectively, and lastly some actors think they know it all and interject themselves in the writing process. Without spoiling the movie; some of these are evident within 'Let There Be Carnage'.
Watching the movie, I think the audience noticed how quickly the movie seemed to be over. It was granted a meager 1:30:00 of film time, which leaves a lot of footage on the cutting room floor. The action is well paced, all though unnecessary & campy in some parts. I believe it's the result of Andy Serkis's direction, as he seems to enjoy big visuals more than plot details ... I defer to his other films as well. There's very little effort in character building as new recruit Shriek (played by Naomie Harris) was the plot coupon, as she was necessary as the motivation for Cletus Kasady (aka Carnage), but essentially irrelevant to the viewer. I like Naomie - I remembered her from '28 Days Later', Pirates of the Caribbean franchise, and the film 'Moonlight'. She's a very good actor, but here she isn't given the room nor depth to shine. It was odd seeing someone of her talent demoted to the background.
Overall I found 'Venom: Let There Be Carnage' funny ... I'd rather an October release provide some scares, and I know this could have done that, but I honestly don't believe Andy Serkis can bring characters to life with his current directorial views. I may be wrong. There may be a 'Venom 2: The Director's Cut' sitting around like a Snyder Cut just waiting to be released. I found most of the action scenes to be long and unfruitful, like putting all your eggs in one basket. It ended quickly and left me feeling like this should have been a short story - A 3-minute feature to simply tie-in the upcoming Marvel Universe release of 'Spider-Man: No Way Home' - This had a great setup for a really good Halloween treat and I'm completely dissatisfied because somebody really dropped the ball here.
| 4
|
All You Zombies is a short story by Robert Heinlein that cleverly outlines a paradox inherent in the concept of time travel.
Predestination takes the story, adds a terrorism story and one more iteration to the whole thing, and then proceeds to unspool a movie in which a huge chunk is one character telling his life story to another character.
The filmmakers spend 100 minutes telling a 20-minute story, and telling it as dully as possible. And the little bit they added in an attempt to make it something more than the intellectual exercise of the original makes it less smart and less ingenious than the story.
On the plus side, the Dickensianly-named Sarah Snook is excellent as the teller of the life story. It's a touching, nuanced performance that can't overcome the bland dialogue and sluggish pace she is stuck with.
Don't bother watching this movie (I'm so perplexed that it's doing so well on IMDB reviews, but go figure). Do bother reading the short story.
| 4
|
I'm neither a die-hard fan of Spiderman comic strips, nor of comic strips at large. If you belong to this 2% of the audience, you might actually enjoy the movie. If you don't, chances are that you will experience a poor story, with poor special effects, and a boring love story. No surprises, nothing original, lots of superfluous stuff to fill the 120 minutes. It's not even remarkably bad.
The high rating proves once more that virtually any movie can make it into the Top#250, provided its marketing budget is big enough (see also: LOTR series).
Conclusions:
1- don't rely on IMDB ratings for heavily hyped movies.
2- don't watch this movie. Go for X-Men II instead.
3- 4/10 points, for watching the movie was just a waste of time, but it didn't hurt too much.
| 4
|
Season 1 was a thriller and season 2 is not even near to that. Waited so long for new episodes and I was really disappointed.
| 2
|
Well. Here we have a very superficial movie about another mentally ill person. Yeah. The Academy Members just love stuff like that. With a glimpse of meaning, but not too thought-provoking. It's a biography that changes the facts, so Nash's story fits into the standard Hollywood scheme. That's the worst thing a biography can do. Lie.
Ron Howard didn't do a bad directing job. It was just lacking in ideas. And the ending ! It was so terrible. Bah. I got sick. There are a lot of worse movies out there so I wanna be fair and give it 5 out of 10 (especially for the performances by Russel Crowe and Jennifer Conelly). Still. The more awards this movie gains, the more I dislike it.
| 5
|
I am a big fan of the xmen movies. But this one is of another class, it is unbelievable bad, very boring, bad action. Definitely overrated.
| 3
|
Barring the 7th episode, entirely series is racy,straight to the point. Story setup,locations, all the actor's did an great job.
| 8
|
I was really excited for this show. It was so hyped up. I've never read the books or played the games but the trailer looked great. After watching it though it just felt so...bland. The acting isn't great, the script is worse. The story jumps around and is a bit hard to follow at times. It's not bad but I can't say it was good either. The fight scenes are cool I'll give it that. I just can't understand the 1/10 or 10/10 reviews.
| 9
|
This show is nog just for a show for children, it has some very good and emotional confusing epidsodes. The character arcs are all so good. Of course there are some episodes that are not that good, but overall 10/10
| 10
|
The best tv show that was ever made and best cooking show , nothing I would say would describe my feelings towards the show but its massively good , brilliant
| 10
|
Oh dear, started off very nicely with the orphanage, relationships, drugs, intrigue and then spiralled downhill quickly into continuous repeats. They could have made this a normal one and half hour film. Plenty of anti-man for the feminists. Boring to the max
| 1
|
If his acting was a character in a movie, people would complain that it had no character arc.
A solid 2/10. It is a mix between the visuals of old Rocket Jump videos (which is a good thing) and.the writing of those cringey Minecraft animations made for 10 year olds.
Maybe I am biased against terrible writing but even the intentionally cringey scenes are unintentionally cringe.
I know they watched too much Hackers but.trying to make intentional too-bad-it's-good movies is a bad idea. It has to come naturally. If it is intentional, then you only have a bad movie like in this case.
Not recommended unless you want your 9 year old to grew up with this movie.
| 2
|
I don't enjoy long shows, because it takes a whole to watch, unlike movies... You may see where I'm going with this. I don't care what people think, I like the movie better than the show. This is why: I prefer live action and I want to watch something quickly then be done with it, With the show you have to watch the entire thing, but with the movie you only have to watch 2 hours. This was one of my least favorite shows growing up, but the movie was one of my favorites. I don't recommend if you don't like long series's, or like movies more than shows. Overall it deserves a 3/10 from me despite the unconditional love from the people who like it.
| 3
|
So, i recently completed this movie of 3.5 hrs and have lot to say about it.
So i start with some positive points of it :-
First, the POLITICS shown in the movie is amazing as expected from the sequel of Godfather.
Second, the MUSIC - it supports visual so well but in specific i like that retro bgm which is so soothing.
Third, STORY BUILDUP is also amazing as this movie has enough time to do it.
Fourth, CAMERA WORK -the visuals of the movie is so good. You can't feel that you are watching a movie of 70s.
Fifth, RETRO FEELING - i don't know why, but i am attached to that old environment.
Sixth, MOTIVATION - yup, after watching the movie, i am so inspired with the character of Micheal Corleone and learned lot of philosophical matter.
Seventh, COSTUMES - the costumes of the mafia gang is so cool. In specific the costume of micheal look badass when combined with his nature.
Last, CHARACTERS - you got attached to each and every character easily.
Now let's talk about some Negative points :-
First, in some part the AUDIO QUALITY is not so good.
Second, as i am not proficient in english language, and this movie have so many HARD WORDS which i can't understand.
Third, the LENGTH of the movie is so long, you can't watch it in one time. If you spend that much time in front screen, it is not good for your eyes. So i suggest you to break it down in parts.
Fourth, despite of having enough time to explain, it is still CONFUSING in some parts and i have to watched that part again to understand.
Fifth, why they put VITO'S HISTORY - that story has no connections with the present storyline. They can easily remove the vito's part to reduce the movie's length or they can make a separate movie of vito's history.
Sixth, the movie has NO PURPOSE, it is like a flow concept. That's why the ending of the movie is not so mind blowing type.
Last, in the movie, you found so many USELESS CONVERSATION which can be easily cutted from the movie.
That's all from my side, hope you like it.
| 9
|
Watching season 3 is like I am watching completely different characters. It's just bad and I'm extremely disappointed. It's just bad family drama with lack of communication, filled with stupid characters making stupid decision. One thing i absolutely hate about movies and series is that charcter making dumb mistakes.
| 5
|
The movie made its point well enough. Sometimes in the midsts of arguments and problems, you forget the wonderful things you have. But understanding this movie did not help me to like it.
The movie was very slow-moving. It was over seventeen minutes before the credits started rolling. I did not like any of the characters very much, although I did feel for them. Life can be painful. But is it truly worth eliminating everything associated with someone (or even a pet) to get rid of the bad? As the plot progressed, I felt an increasing desire to turn it off and leave. I had already decided for myself on the point the movie made, so to me it was a sad story that I would rather not ever think about again.
| 1
|
I appreciated Christopher Nolan's interpretation of the events in "Dunkirk," and how he focused on the sounds and sights to connect the audience to the terror and uncertainty experienced by those who were involved. Visually, it's very exciting, especially the dogfights in the skies and the strafing of boats on the water. He obviously made a conscious decision to reveal almost nothing of a personal nature about any of these characters, including their names in some cases. You simply don't know anything about them, which is risky in a movie. Why should the audience care about some character we don't know? As the movie plays out, you do come to fill in those gaps a bit due to the excellent actors involved, particularly Mark Rylance, Tom Hardy, Cillian Murphy and Jack Lowden. I assume Nolan's purpose for doing this was to show that it was this very large group of individuals coming together to do something miraculous in a time of global peril, when truly, their whole world and way of life was in jeopardy. Still, I couldn't help thinking that he might have added a few minutes here and there to give us more information or background on these men. The younger ones seem completely anonymous and almost blank.
The soundtrack is very loud at times, and there's "ticking" that conveys the sense of danger and impending doom. It's almost as if you hear these men's hearts beating because they're just terrified. The action scenes are very well done. U.S. viewers (particularly younger ones) who are not familiar with the events of Dunkirk or the larger geopolitical situation of the start of WW2 would do well to read up on it a bit before seeing "Dunkirk," because Christopher Nolan is not wasting any film on explaining it all to you. I think people who like war movies in general or scenes with edge-of-your-seat action will enjoy this movie, but anyone who wants deeper character exposition will find it wanting.
| 7
|
Greetings again from the darkness. Should this be labeled a historical drama? Is it one man's extraordinary tale of strength and survival? Does this fall into the "art film" category that so divides the movie-going public? The answer to all is YES, and I would add that it's a masterfully crafted film with exquisite story telling, stunning photography and top notch acting throughout.
The movie is based on the real life and writings of Solomon Northrup, a free man who was kidnapped and sold into slavery from 1841-53. Northrup's story provides us a look inside the despicable institution of slavery. Needless to say, it's a painful and sad process made even more emotional by the work of director Steve McQueen (Hunger, Shame). McQueen takes a very direct approach. Not much is left to the imagination. Torture, abuse, cruelty and misery take up the full screen. The only subtlety comes from the terrific work of Chiwetel Ejiofor as Northrup. His facial expressions and eyes are more powerful and telling than any lines of dialogue could be.
You will not find many details from the movie here. This is one to experience for yourself. It lacks the typical Hollywood agenda when it comes to American history. Instead this era is presented through the eyes of a single wronged man and his quest to return to his wife and kids, no matter the inhumane obstacles. We see Paul Giamatti as an emotionless, all-business slave trader. Benedict Cumberbatch is a plantation owner who has a heart, but lacks business savvy. And finally we enter the world of cotton farmer Michael Fassbender, who twists Bible scripture into threats directed at the slaves - his "property".
Fassbender dives deep into evil to find his character, and along with Ejiofor, Sarah Paulsen (who plays Fassbender's icy wife), and Lupita Nyong'o (who plays slave Patsey, the center of the two most incredible scenes in the film), provide more Oscar worthy performances than any one movie can expect. You will also note Quvenzhane Wallis (as Northrup's daughter) and Dwight Henry (as a slave) in their first appearances since Beasts of the Southern Wild. Other strong support comes from Scoot McNairy, Taran Killam (SNL), Michael K Williams, Alfre Woodward, a nasty Paul Dano, Garret Dillahunt and Adepero Oduye.
Steven Spielberg gave us a taste of the holocaust with Schindler's List, but not since the TV mini-series "Roots" has any project come so close to examining the realities of slavery. Northrup's story seems to be from a different universe than the charming slaves of Gone with the Wind. I would argue that what makes this watchable (though very difficult) is the focus on Northrup's story. While tragic, his ending actually deflects from the ongoing plight of those not so fortunate. It's a story of a man who states he doesn't wish to merely survive, he wants to live a life worth living.
McQueen's direction will certainly be front and center come awards season, as will many of the actors, John Ridley (the screenwriter), Sean Bobbitt (cinematographer) and Hans Zimmer (score). The only question is whether the subject matter is too tough for Oscar voters, who traditionally lean towards projects a bit more mainstream.
| 8
|
Boring and when you came to think that could be fun in some parts its just annoying
| 4
|
I watched this animated show and it quite uneven, some cartoonish and silly and some serious but overall underwhelming.
Thor is turned into a mostly useless goofball and Captain America, Tony Starks Ironman, Hulk and Vision are barely in it. The characters I like the least like Black Widow and Hawkeye is in it way too much. And someone called Captain Carter, who I have never seen before and did not appeal to me much. Captain Marvel is here as well and like in MCU she is overpowered but also super-boring.
The only character I liked was Dr Strange characters, the few episodes he was in, but it is not enough to save this show. I dont expect much from the next season because it lacks the magic and characters if early MCU.
Maybe the next season will be more mature and with better characters but I doubt it. It seems the creator of this show does not understand what made MCU successful and being an animated cartoon I dont expect it become more an older audience with less goofiness and childish humor. I hope it gets rebooted.
| 3
|
This movie is a disgrace for 2017 films! A poor performance and a very lame storyline!
I do not get how this movie got 7.5!!!! what a shame IMDB
| 2
|
I saw this movie for the first time when I was still a pre-teen, because one of the girls I knew from school (an older teenager) was obsessed with it. I didn't get it back then.
I saw this movie again in my late teens, and didn't get it then, either. Watched it again the other day, and I STILL don't get it!
I don't understand what all the fuss is about. It's unremarkable, boring, predictable, monotonous, and thoroughly mediocre. As if that wasn't enough, it also manages to be offensive to boot.
The plot was disgustingly predictable and uninspiring; the dialogue - horrendous.
There was ZERO chemistry between the lead actors. In fact, it was quite apparent that they can't stand each other.
Speaking of characters, - they were all HIGHLY unlikeable.
Johnny = obnoxious, arrogant, self-absorbed, one-dimensional a***hole.
Baby = obnoxious, arrogant, self-absorbed, one-dimensional slag.
And it's actually quite disgusting that Patrick Swayze, who seems to be in his mid-30s, is sleeping with a girl 15-20 years his junior. Granted, she was a slapper, but was this movie made to glamorize child molesters or underage hookers? Don't get me wrong, I did like "Lolita" (where the same was happening, but it's expected, and actually quite tastefully done), but this... was just creepy and disturbing.
It's just my opinion, but I think one must be slightly retarded to refer to this utter disgrace as a "masterpiece".
| 2
|
For all its stylish good looks, I found the story ponderous, repetitive and clichéd. The self destruct element of the heroine, in particular, seemed forced. The final episode was so painstakingly slow, I had to resort to the +10 sec button throughout. I know for sure, I missed nothing. Relieved to the finally see the credits roll. That said, the performances were good and the chess aspect, authentic and serious.
| 6
|
Just don't understand why this character Ani had to be introduced to the show, just doesn't make any sense, she's really annoying, she's nosy and she's everywhere.
| 8
|
Guess the idea is OK but it's really bad executed.
| 2
|
From a Bangladeshi perspective, some might find this movie as offensive & disrespectful to Bangladesh. But if you are true action movie lover fan that would be fine with you. For those who has such complaints i will suggest them to remember the similar story plot showed in Fast Five Movie by Dewayn Johnson Rock & Ven Diesel . I hope they will get it.
I m pleased with the action sequence of this movie And hope so will get a chance to watch sequel of this movie.
Best wisher for the team Extraction.
Love from Bangladesh ❤
| 7
|
Beautiful movie, with solid acting and drama, with involving speeches, controversial characters and motivations, fine story. So, in the end, all idiotic words, preudo-critics and lies that were said about this picture by russian-speaking( but to be fair, not only the russian speaking) audience( especially by and supported with one certain popular person's help) , they all just expired, after personal acquaintance with this picture. That was kinda like watching the artwork, like visiting a theatre.
BTW, warm hi from russian cinematography lover, that is happy not to be an idiot)
| 7
|
I absolutely love this show it can not be released fast enough. im in love with the story. its a completely different from the rest of the supernatural shows available.
| 10
|
The first two episodes of the show are very slow and seem very clichéd; a highschool romance between a girl and guy from different social classes, really? Let me just say the show really grows on you, despite its simplicity, it delves into deep and complex issues and feelings; the intimacy, fears, insecurities, love and friendship are portrayed beautifuly in the show. The show compelled me to read the book; it gives it a lot of context. After reading it, I watched the show again and fell in love with it. It's a must watch!
| 8
|
I am generally not a big fan of the 12A action films released ad nauseam these days but i enjoyed the gritty nature of this story and appreciated the action set pieces alot more than the usual CGI bore fests.
| 6
|
I saw this movie twice. It's an alright movie but really has no
exceptional value. Certainly not as much as everyone seems to
think. I believe people heap praise upon it because other people
TELL them this is the best movie ever. I say to those people grow
a backbone and watch some better movies.
| 4
|
Apart from the last 2 episodes, the show was really horrible and so boring, hopefully there will be no second season!, it was painful to finish this one!
| 1
|
The biggest reason I was hesitant to watch Wednesday was because of what it was advertised as. It's pretty hard to do a respectable job with a young adult property let alone produce a good one. There's been so many attempts, anything geared towards teenagers is almost forced to parody itself just to dodge people overtly giggling and smirking at it. Wednesday doesn't avoid all the pitfalls but I was pleasantly surprised that it navigated its way around as many of them as they did. The central mystery was interesting enough that I didn't know outright guess it halfway through and although I'm not the biggest Tim Burton fan (I like some of his work, other projects... not so much) his experienced hand and Gothic sensibilities are perfect for this budding franchise. Despite the occasional misstep, I was impressed at how the show kept up the pace and didn't become too rote after each adventure with Wednesday. The creative team may not have created the new Citizen Kane but there was effort put into the story here and I appreciated that.
Instead of the whole Addams Family being at the forefront, we focus on the titular Wednesday as the protagonist and there's a lot of work put into understanding her mindset at this point in her life. She's a sullen and angry teenager but she's also got a razor sharp wit and a passion for seeking out the truth in her surroundings. I do think they sanded off a couple of the sharper edges from previous versions of the character (the jokes she tells are similar but she's less edgy in her interactions with others), but it was a necessary sacrifice as she needs to at least be semi-approachable by her classmates and other members of the Nevermore community. As much as her rebellious streak could have been annoying or cliche, the writers frame it as her wanting to step out of Morticia and Gomez's shadows and forge her own identity. She's still suitably prickly, but much like the Grinch, her heart grows a couple of sizes by the end of the initial season. Some of the supporting characters are given some nice mini-arcs like learning to stand up for yourself (Eugene), learning to accept yourself for who you are and live your best life (Enid) and even to let go of bias and preconceived notions and moving forward with an open mind (Sheriff Galpin and Principal Weems). Is it all stuff we've seen before? Perhaps, but it gives the background players some material to chew on while Wednesday skulks around Jericho.
I wasn't thrilled with much of the casting, I grew up watching Raul Gulia, Anjelica Huston and Christina Ricci as the Addams Family but once again, Wednesday left me taken aback. I was swayed by Jenna Ortega's fascinating work as Wednesday. I wasn't familiar with her before this but if she's not a star already, this should catapult her to the next level. She gets Wednesday's biting humour and she even brings some physicality to her performance. She's excellent at being stone-faced and motionless while she's interrogating suspects or making biting criticisms of her peers. Gwendoline Christie does a gratifying job of playing against type as Principal Weems, she's a figurehead who's all smiles in front of the cameras but an imposing figure behind the scenes. Gwendoline does a solid job of portraying her duplicitous nature. Christina Ricci (famous for previously playing Wednesday Adams) is a nice bit of casting as Marilyn Thornhill. She's very sweet and convincing as a sympathetic ear to Wednesday and it was fun to see her again in this property. Luis Guzman and Catherine Zeta Jones grew on me as Gomez and Morticia. Zeta-Jones was the standout of the 2 but they both got the strange beat that Gomez and Morticia dance to together as they fawn over each other in every single moment. I'd also like to credit Emma Myers, Hunter Doohan and Joy Sunday respectively for their work as Enid, Tyler and Bianca. All 3 of them had some standout moments and were good in their supporting roles.
While Wednesday is certainly intriguing and is raised above the normal fair by its excellent lead performance, the material itself is cribbed from a lot of other YA properties. It's faithful to the Addams Family spirit but the teenage private eye angle, the school for outcasts, the separate social clubs/houses are all either borrowed from previous series like Riverdale or successful movie properties like Harry Potter. Any effort in the genre is going to have similarities but even when explaining parts of the show to my family, their comments were "okay, so just like __________?" The only retort I could offer is that while it does "borrow" many bits and pieces, Wednesday does it well enough that you can almost forget/forgive them for it. But I have watched my fair share of YA material and these thoughts were still present in my mind as I binge watched every episode.
I got a lot more out of Wednesday than I expected to and I'm happy to applaud it for that. I'm not in the target audience but due to the efforts of Ortega and the cast, the great Gothic atmosphere, an adequate central mystery and some chuckle worthy jokes, I was happy I took the time despite my reservations. Wednesday may not be wholly original but it's still an upper tier entry in a genre that's best days are long since past. I'd be happy to watch a 2nd season for sure. Wednesday is plenty creepy, kooky, mysterious and spooky enough to justify your time on Netflix.
| 8
|
People have written much longer reviews so I am not going to go there. I saw it about 2 years ago and all I can say about it is arrrrrggggggghhhh! I almost hit my head on the coffee table from falling asleep twice. Can't remember much about it except that I found it hard to grasp and when I did...I did not care.
I normally don't go to extremes when reviewing things, whether it is restaurants, hotels or movies. I always believe the truth is somewhere in the middle but this movie, and then the adulation heaped upon it made me mad!!!! Think Elaine from Seinfeld after watching the English Patient and you have how I feel.
Thank you!!
| 1
|
I stumbled upon this series by chance. I was born in the late '60s so I just decided to keep watching because I love Marvel's stories. At first, it reminded me of Bewitched who I used to love but this is deliberately overacted with an exaggerated laughing audience in the background. I grew up with sitcoms but I wasn't planning to watch one so, after the first 5 minutes of the second episode, I got bored and stopped watching. Why would Marvel get involved in such nonsense, I asked myself so it was only after I watched the mid season trailer on YouTube that I decided to continue watching and now I'm hooked. If you are patient, things will start to unfold in a very unexpected way.
| 8
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.