Review
stringlengths 6
10.3k
| Rating
int64 1
10
|
|---|---|
The whole story line was stupid , what a waste of time . can't believe people on here are actually giving this a 10 ...like seriously ?
| 1
|
Nice tv serie, i don't know how can be ppl trying to stop the next season.
Why ppl dont let be, and don't ley everyone choose ,like adam did, why to try to avoid a next season just because the catholics are mad.
And amazing montage, nice direction, nice acting, just a little complains about some 3d effects. but the script, adaptation, lighting, camera , edition and everything else were dice done.
Can't wait to the next battle between humans vs heaven+hell and new retrospectives from Aziraphale & Crowley, there are so many things to tell us about them.
| 8
|
I'm not a die hard fan of the series but I enjoyed the first two. I was extremely disappointed during and after the film ended. Stark's actions and decisions didn't make any sense and I'm getting tired of his arrogance and sarcasm. Didn't have any of the "magic" from the first two films. I didn't feel his character evolved in any manner and, in fact, he seems to have regressed. I was told there were a lot of one liners that were funny but they were missed on me. Very little humor and unbelievable how immature Stark has become. I won't give away the ending but it was obvious what would occur and not enough to pull the whole movie together. It's a shame but I think they should stop now. Please, just stop the madness! Wish I could get my time and money back.
| 3
|
TVF Pitchers (2015) is an unexpectedly amazing, refreshing TV series to come out of India.
It focuses on the much hyped (deservingly though) and blooming startup scenario in India and thus tremendously appeals to students, entrepreneurs, investors and business owners.
The 2015 edition (Season 1) is well received by the audience and is a true success.
What I really liked?
In real world, while some people value 'the idea' too much, the first season of the series doesn't even have a disclosure on what the 'idea' is. Instead the focus is something way more important - the team.
And, despite being genuinely humorous at many points, it also drives nearby relationships, sacrifices and serious talks and quotes that one could remember for long. :)
Whom to watch out for?
Though the whole cast gives a glimpse of their brilliance time and again, i find Mondal's acting something to watch out for.
If you haven't watched it - go for it, that's a no-brainer!
| 10
|
With the usual cinematic detective tropes but a haunting background score and arresting overall filmmaking that will keep you on the edge of your seat, Ratsasan (Monster) excels as a psychological thriller and police procedural that traces an unknown psycho serial killer. TN.
| 6
|
Season one of this series was pretty good,season 2,well they made it a complete garbage.I am a big comic book fan but this series is nothing compared to the comics version of Daredevil.
Getting 8.8 ratings for this series is really absurd since season 2 completely ruined the whole series.Episodes of season 2 were pretty boring as well,as they were 50 minutes long,felt like really hard work watching the complete episode. I've heard how people say how awesome this show is (especially season 2),but those people are just Marvel fanboys, I don't know how this series kept it's rating of 8.8 after that awful season 2,but I can assure you it doesn't deserve good ratings.
| 1
|
I loved this show when it first started. It was original (sort of) and had a great dynamic cast that worked out well on screen. But then a couple quit the show and it all went down hill from there. While the first 4 or 5 seasons were good, the last 2 were absolutely awful and unbearable. They should have quit when they were ahead because now I cant forget the bad. I'm not kidding when I say it was so bad I couldn't finish it. I mean how often do you get so vested in a show and watch all of it up to the final season and it is so bad you dont want to finish? Unfortunately that's how community ended.
| 6
|
Captivating from start to finish. Minus that one cringe joke.
| 9
|
Even Jenna Ortega (who Carrie's the show), Christina Ricci and Gwendoline Christie who exceed in their roles can't save this show.
Where is Tim Burton?? Not in this show that's for sure!! Since when did Wednesday develop feelings?? She's iconic in her darkness and sarcasm which are lacking here.
This is only a pathetic blend of Sabrina the teenage witch, Harry Potter and X-men that they decided to add "the Addams Family" in the mix and even the Addams Family is not present at all.
Some will argue it's about the daughter. But I don't know who this Wednesday is because it's definitely not Wednesday ADAMS. Loved Christina Ricci's Wednesday and I'm sticking with that version and the original in black and white. This would have been pleasant if it had been called differently with other names for the characters as it is exactly that...same names for the old characters we love but with a much changed scenario, plot and overall lack of dark humor.
I'd say it deserves a 4.5 but since there's no half stars I'll give it a 4.
| 4
|
I don't understand how this movie is being rated and reviewed so highly. It was a train wreck from beginning to end. People were leaving the theater. The only reason I didn't rate this disaster a 1 was for the semi-satisfying ending.
| 2
|
Red Sparrow is a 2018 spy film that tells the story of Dominika Egorova (Jennifer Lawrence), a Bolshoi dancer who, after a break in her left leg, is forced to withdraw from the world of dance. Forced by the Russian authorities, as the only way to maintain her privileges and those of her sick mother, the young woman is recruited by the secret services of her country. Dominika will be part of a top-secret KGB program called Red Sparrow. There, she will learn the art of espionage using methods of seduction, a very effective system to extract information from enemy informants.
In my opinion the film is quite good compared to other spy films (not counting 007), although the synopsis has several gaps, the cinematography, acting and soundtrack make the film enjoyable.
| 8
|
Captain America: Civil War has it's flaws, but that doesn't stop me from liking it.
What this movie does so well is that it's really hard to pick a side, because both sides have a very good reason to be at each others throats. One minute I'm rooting for Tony, and the next I'm rooting for Cap. It's conflict like this that I couldn't decide for myself on who side I was on or who was right, but that's just the fun of it.
Tom Holland as Spider-Man might be one of the best adaption of the character that we've had. Sony studios has made over five Spider-Man movies and the two actors who played Spider-Man (Maguire and Garfield), did their very best of what their got, but didn't quite capture the character that we know and love. But the Spider-Man in this movie has a screen time of 30 minutes or more, and Holland managed to capture the character.
Speaking of good casting - Chadwick Boseman was good as Black Panther.
Now for the problems: Daniel Brühl is a boring villain. I honestly can't remember much about his character in the movie and that's because he was forgettable. Daniel Brühl is great actor but doesn't really stand out.
Martin Freeman is a great actor but he doesn't do anything special or interesting in this movie. Yes,his character is probably going to developed more in the future, but my problem here is that he really felt out of place in this movie.
The story was a bit meh and there was a little bit too much quick cut edits in the fight scenes that I couldn't get all that infested with. Now don't get me wrong, I like the airport fight and the Iron Man V Cap fight, because those scenes didn't have stupid quick cuts and I could easily see whats happening. I think it's the hand-to-hand combat fights that are too cutter for me to see what's going on. That's just my opinion.
Overall Captain America: Civil War is a good film but personally I would have preferred this further down the line when more characters had been introduced to the MCU.
| 7
|
A good mystery thriller with so many mind bending twists. A great screenplay along with natural instincts. There is only one glitch in plot ie the makeup of Mary Fernandes & Christopher. But it's okay. Good and a must see movie. Hindi version I have seen on you tube guys.
| 10
|
4.5 out of 5 stars.
Wandavision is a pretty good first mcu series following on characters like Wanda and Vision after endgame. Now to avoid spoilers about the plot and concept and characters appearances. Is best to see for yourself. Which may surprise some with new faces to the mcu.
What worked with the series? The plot and concept is an interesting mix to the series. Wanda and Vision living in a sitcom like world. Living a normal daily life. While all may not be what it seems. Can not talk more about the plot without giving away twists. The story does dive more into details about Wanda. And her past. And what she may become for the future of mcu.
The cast ensemble worked great. It was fun seeing Elizabeth Olson and Paul Bettany return. Along with Randall Park. And new faces like Teyonah Parris and Kathryn Hahn.
The series does pick up half way through when twists are revealed. And does have a climatic action sequence with villain being revealed and good vs bad happens. Which was pretty cool. The visual effects were not that bad for a tv series.
Wanda discovering more about herself with her abilities is awesome. Which would be exciting to see where the characters can go next for future mcu.
What did not work with the series?
The first half of the series direction is pretty slow and cheesy. With several episodes having that sitcom tone for each decade with each episode. It was fun but cheesy and slow.
Kat Dennings returning as Darcy is still cheesy with annoying dialogue that is supposed to be funny. Her character is still pushed aside in the sidelines for the most part.
Overall, Wandavision is a fun addition. Delivers more depth with the characters. Action and visuals. But cheesy first half of the series.
| 9
|
'Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1' exceeds all expectations, every Harry Potter movie keeps on getting better and better and this film is the current gem of the franchise. It also conveys a very important message at its heart, especially about fascism. We are reminded of all those years ago of when another dastardly figure had quite similar ideas to 'He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named'. From the very first gravely words spoken by Bill Nighy: "These are dark times, there's no denying", we know that we are in for a 'treat'.
Brilliantly directed by David Yates (who has had the honour of directing the franchise since 'Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix') 'The Deathly Hallows: Part 1' is the beginning of the end of an epic adventure and it satisfies its audience with drama, action and some incredibly moving scenes (especially the final act). This 'Harry Potter' is nothing like the previous films, it is darker, more serious and there is the worrying phenomenon of sexual maturity for Harry, Ron and Hermione. The professional use of CGI and breathtakingly beautiful scenes also add to the greatness of the film, I just loved the way that they designed the Malfoy Manor. All of these factors make the whole film an exhilarating ride.
Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint and Emma Watson are all brilliant, it is amazing to see how much they have grown up and how their acting skills have flourished over the years, they have grown from children to young adults – they carry the series with their professional acting. Other famous faces (who are mostly very talented veteran British actors) must not be forgotten, such as Ralph Fiennes, Helena Bonham Carter, Robbie Coltrane, Brendan Gleeson, Alan Rickman, John Hurt, Rhys Ifans, Jason Isaacs, David Thewlis, Julie Walters and many more who have had the honour of appearing in this iconic franchise.
However, a special mention must go to the screenwriter: Steve Kloves, who adds a lot of gloom at various points but then surprises us with light humour, which is effectively crafted in a way that it doesn't really distract the viewer from what the grim reality of the situations that Harry, Ron and Hermione are in. Kloves sure knows how to adapt a book into a film and he hasn't made a single mistake with 'Deathly Hallows Pt. 1'.
What I was most pleased about 'Deathly Hallows Pt. 1' was the fact that it wasn't in 3D – for this format would have entirely ruined the film for me because like some other films which were originally supposed to be in 2D but had 3D incorporated to it in the post-production stage, it would have lowered the brightness and clarity. It is a shame that part. 2 will be in 3D and I fear that it will suffer in brightness and clarity, but let's hope that the traditional Warner Brothers will decide to change their mind like they did with part. 1.
4 ½ out of 5 (exceptional) – The best Harry Potter to date, and I am sure that this statement will change when part. 2 is released.
| 9
|
Bad move marvel, next time get michael bay or a director with actual skill instead of a nobody to make your entire show.
| 1
|
The expected hauntingly macabre humour and the dark mischievous wit is no where to be seen. It's too tamed, too soft, too dull and too blandly predictable to be enjoyable. The show has sucked out every bit of morbid sense and left it with a generic vanilla teen murder mystery show. Emo girl wannabe detective with her unknown powers and her trusted preppy side-kick, trying to solve a + something years old mystery and you guessed it - a Prophecy involving her, dun, dun, duuuun....
Honestly it's like Veronica Mars meets Scooby Doo meets Monster high, set in a dupe Hogwarts. I suppose I should be thankful that they didn't make her an orphan to the boot.
Honestly hard-core Addams fans know that the paranormal and supernatural is something that was supposed to be uniquely Addams. Their whole charm was that they were the oddballs in a normal world. Wednesday being in a society of likes makes it less whimsical and more bland.
To think that I had such high expectations for something that turned out to be nothing but a lackluster G-rated teen fantasy.
This show could have had soo much potential and yet it was squandered away by its too many non-Addams characters. Not even Jenna Ortega, who was doing an admirable job as Wednesday can save this show. Tim Burton has lost his touch.
| 1
|
The fans were promised adaptation faithful to the source material (i.e. The books). In season 1 we've got butchered short stories from Sword of Destiny & The Last Wish and some, mostly bad, brand new ideas.
In season 2 we've got butchered "A Grain of Truth" (The Last Wish) and a story 99% unrelated to the saga. What's even worse in 99% the brand new ideas of the writing staff are terrible.
To add insult to injury we've got (mostly) bad acting by (mostly) miscast actors and actresses, and not particularly good CGI, costumes and props.
Witcher fans deserve much better.
Switch off Netflix's Witcher On Henry have mercy On Henry have mercy, oh Switch off Netflix's Witcher Be a friend of humanity.
| 1
|
I'd like to know Scorsese's reasoning for making this film, but I think I already know the answer. Nostalgia can be a nice thing. But this feels like a depressing attempt at "getting the band back together" when the members are old and stale. Not to mention a plot that hasn't been new for 30 years at LEAST.
De Niro might be de-aged for the majority, but his bent posture says otherwise. Why not allow the cast to portray characters of their own age? To say the CGI is unconvincing here would be an understatement. I don't know how they dragged poor Pesci into this, but even as a supporting character he pulls his weight. Pacino might be overdoing it, but perhaps that was an attempt to fill in the blanks of De Niro's performance.
I was surprised to see Scorsese leave some much-loved ingredients out here. Where was the clever dialogue, the tension, the drama, the skillfull camera-work? Were any of the characters written with emotion in mind, because I don't recall seeing any of them express it.
Forgetting about the plot (there's not much to mention, anyway) if this had been a film centred around the characters at their true, older age, it may have made more sense. Perhaps it would have symbolised the end of an era for Scorsese, or reflected his own aging process. If nothing else, it would have worked far better than having a 76 year play someone in their "prime". It may have even been a good movie.
Hopefully we see something better from Scorsese in the future and can forget any of this ever happened.
| 2
|
Great article http://fifaworldcup2014livescores.com/ this article i just so awesome, this will have a great impart on peoples mind.I don't normally review TV shows, but after seeing the pilot of Hannibal, I am compelled. As the (arguably) foremost monster of all time, Hannibal Lechter still fascinates and appalls us at the same time. His suave, debonair demeanor and taste, combined with his overwhelming brilliance makes him the most attractive monster since Dexter (or Gary Oldman in Dracula).
So it was with great expectations and serious doubts that I approached NBC's Hannibal. After all, besides praising the Obama administration, what does NBC do well? I was very pleasantly surprised.
Hugh Dancy (Will Graham) and Mads Mikkelson (Hannibal) are great. As they work together on the current case, they are probing each other's psyche and working to establish control, command, dominance over the other (naturally more on Dr. Lechter's part that Will's). In a take off on Dexter, Dr. Lechter is part of the team the FBI has brought in to help solve the latest serial killer problem. What is always compelling about Hannibal is that he always is in control. He has thought out how he will proceed, how he will step in the water closely with those who would naturally want to stop him in his curious habits, yet while always being able to protect himself. (Another good example of this is Anthony Hopkins in Fracture - if you haven't seen it, you should).
| 8
|
I had high expectations for this film and i did enjoy it, however i also left the cinema feeling a bit disappointed. I thought it looked beautiful, had an interesting setup in terms of the situations of the people, both on earth and in space. BUT and it's a big but for me, i think it was too long, badly paced and by the end i couldn't help thinking it had all got a bit too carried away with it's own far fetched theories. I don't mind going along with it, even if it's all a bit of fantasy but when this film tries so hard to stick to what is theoretically possible i think it does a terrible job of bringing that to a realistic presentation. By the end i'd given up caring about the characters as i felt a bit ripped off by the last 20 minutes.
I would have liked more action on the planets surfaces and a bit less of the waffle in the space ship or at least less waffle and more action. I like Mr Nolan and i loved Inception but for me this wasn't as good as that.
| 7
|
I wont rate it 1 cause the actors are fantastic and the CGI is flawless. But entertainment wise if you enjoy the usual one sided narrative media and Hollywood spews out politically, and if your a fan of virtue signaling then this show is for you. If like me rather a good action story that's entertaining then give this a miss. 2 characters I really enjoyed from the movies ruined with this lame ass attempt. Was really hoping this would be as good as Wanda vision. Not even close.
| 3
|
I was looking forward to this movie. So much praise and all those Oscar nominations... I was disappointed. Yes, it is well made; yes, it was well acted (Carrel was particularly good, Bale played his usual twisted character); but I was bored, even dozed off somewhere through the first half so I had to rewind and start again. The events in question are recent and are still fresh in our memories, we know how it all ends. More than once I was ready to wrap it up, but it kept twisting and stretching. It had its funny moments. I might see it again in the hope I can find those treasurable moments other reviews talk about but I'm not holding my breath. There are better things out there at the moment.
| 4
|
The film boasts stunning visuals and a standout performance by Michael Cera. However, Margot Robbie, Ryan Gosling, and Will Ferrell's presence felt out of place in their respective roles. While I admired its message advocating for gender equality and challenging the patriarchy, the execution came off as overly simplistic and reductive. The handling of these crucial themes felt disjointed, resulting in a somewhat exhausting two-hour experience. It's an important film, and I'm pleased with its success, yet it fits more into the category of a movie for passing time during a flight. My high expectations for it only amplified the sense of disappointment.
| 6
|
When I reviewed "Salt", a spy thriller which came out in 2010 but could have been made, with only a few changes to the plot, in the fifties, sixties or seventies, I said that some American film-makers seemed to be living in an alternative reality in which the Berlin Wall never fell, the Soviet Union survived into the twenty-first century and the Cold War is still continuing. And eight years on we have "Red Sparrow", made in 2018 but which could have been made, with virtually no changes to the plot, in the fifties, sixties or seventies. The adjective "red" in the title implies that Americans still think of Russians as communists.
Dominika Egorova is a beautiful young star of the Bolshoi Ballet who suffers an injury which ends her dancing career. Now, given that Dominika is a famous prima ballerina, one would have thought there would have been plenty of opportunities for her to continue working in the world of ballet, either as a teacher or on the administrative or production side, but according to the film the only alternative employment Dominika can find to keep the wolf from the door and to continue funding medical treatment for her elderly mother is as a spy. And she only gets that job through her paternal uncle Ivan, a high-up official in the SVR (new name for the KGB).
As part of her new profession Dominika becomes a sparrow. Not, of course, in the literal sense of the word; a "sparrow" in this sense is a spy trained in the arts of seduction to obtain information from a target. Her mission is to seduce Nate Nash, a CIA operative, and obtain the identity of "Marble", a mole in the upper echelons of the Russian government who is leaking information to the Americans. I won't set out the plot in any further detail, because in the age-old tradition of the espionage movie it becomes very complicated, but it inevitably involves Dominika and Nate falling in love.
Before seeing this film, I had never previously seen any film starring Jennifer Lawrence, although I had certainly heard her name often enough. Actually, she is one of the best things about this movie, giving a very good performance as Dominika, making her both icily seductive and at the same time sympathetic. Of course, we are given to understand that Dominika's heart is not really in her work and that she has been virtually forced into espionage by the ruthless Ivan. (Indeed, the film's position seems to be that most, if not all, Russian spies have taken up that line of work because they have been forced into it by the authorities and are too frightened to refuse. The idea that Russians might be motivated to serve their country by patriotism in the same way as Americans does not seem to have occurred to the scriptwriters).
There is another decent performance from Matthias Schoenaerts as Ivan- I found myself wondering if he had been cast because he bears a certain resemblance to a younger version of Vladimir Putin- but Joel Edgerton does not make much impression as Nate. My main criticisms of the film, however, do not have anything to do with the acting. I said above that the plot is complicated- in fact it is excessively so, and often difficult to follow. At around 140 minutes, the film is also overlong, and could have done with some judicious pruning. (Possibly by removing the sub-plot about Dominika's colleague Marta, who is running an SVR plot to obtain classified information from an American politician's aide).
I also found the film gratuitously violent in places, but my main reason for disliking it was that it attempted to breathe new life into a moribund genre, and failed. It is a film at least forty years behind the times, a film which panders to a growing xenophobia in America (and elsewhere in the West) about Russia, a form of xenophobia which now seems as widespread on the political left as it is on the right. 5/10
A goof. "Marta" is not a Russian name; the Russian form would be "Marfa".
| 5
|
This has got to be the best anthology type show I have ever seen. I am astonished by how often an episode leaves me breathless. This show is at the apex of the current batch of brilliant TV shows. It is a commentary on contemporary society, technology, love, loss, remembrance, apathy, sympathy, pathos, and metaphysics. It is sometimes satirical, sometimes sad, and sometimes biting and sardonic. It is witty, beautifully written, directed and cast. Wish it could go on forever.
| 9
|
I usually only go to a cinema to see horror movies, all other movies I watch on amazon prime or Netflix. I was very excited to see Annabelle comes home because the previous movies in the series were actually interesting however I was very disappointed. The movie was very short and anticlimactic, there was so much potential to actually make it scary but it was all wasted. Don't waste your time or money in this movie. The use of a mythical creature made it feel like a teenage high school series. All in all it was very bland.
| 2
|
This movie isn't what I expected it to be, but it kept my attention.
| 10
|
Brilliantly slick watch..highly recommended...brilliantly shot!!
| 9
|
The most stressful movie I have seen ..pure noise during 135m. Unless you want to have a headache, wouldn't bother
| 5
|
This is a total rip off of the original Disney!! Few very good dialogues are missing. The charisma of Muffassa is missing , it just doesn't have that feel , that music , that aura that would grip you , hook you and take you in total trance of the grandeur of the king. Nothing like the real thing !!!!
| 2
|
"Fargo:" has to be one of the most overrated films in history. Academy Award nominations and wins? Breathless praise for Frances McDormand? Talk of it as a classic? One of the best 100 movies of all time?
Give me a break! I'm sorry, but the plot was as flat as the landscape, the violence was off-putting and there wasn't enough humor to make this movie a black comedy. I don't have anything against the Coen brothers; "Raising Arizona" was great. But this effort failed miserably, in my opinion.
Why was McDormand honored so highly? All she did was walk around a little, drink coffee and talk in an exaggerated Midwest accent. Macy, I'll admit, was good. But overall, the film was a miserable waste of time. I guess I'll never understand some people's idea of "classic."
| 2
|
What made the first show fun was the creatures and straightforward plot. This film takes away the beasts and adds one hugely unnecessary red herring of a subplot that burns a large part of runtime.
Ultimately, Johnny Depp is unconvincing as a charismatic villian on top of the awful (over 9000) power levels. Also, one particular character's motivations make zero sense, because just...No.
| 5
|
Finished season 1. Absolutely a delight to watch. Excellent cinematography. Very good performances. Refreshing story line. Short and simple.
| 9
|
It would be a good series if they would leave politics and all the little digs out of comments about cops and race. The world hears it every day on the news we just want a good series that we can enjoy without things we constantly hear on the news everyday. Tired of Hollywood making everything political. Just give us a good series. Not fair to the fans that just want to enjoy television without being preached too.
| 7
|
If you love movies, you will love The Fabelmans. This movie is an absolute delight and it is the definition of art. I am not sure I have seen this good of a movie since at least before the pandemic and it is certainly one of the best movies of the last ten years at least. Even after 2 and a half hours I still wanted more. This movie pulls you in and it is impossible to look away. Michelle Williams & Paul Dano should take away their long overdue Oscars for this film and newcomer Gabriel LaBelle was tremendous playing the role of Sammy Fabelman. Supporting roles from Seth Rogen and Judd Hirsch were also a very fun addition. This movie delivers all the emotions a film possibly can, and it will undoubtedly leave you with a smile on your face when the credits begin to roll. Steven Spielberg should be a lock for Best Director. He most definitely deserves it. This is the best film of 2022 and I hope the Academy will agree. The Fabelmans is just movie magic. 10/10 A+ Absolutely Recommend.
| 10
|
This film tries to be smart....but it's executed terribly. The supporting characters are poorly acted and the fact you have to spend hours reading up on what the hell happened to make any sense of it (and even the know you are trusting other people's confused interpretations), proves it's not been done well.
There will be those out there saying that if you don't like it, it's just because you don't understand it......no..... You can do clever, thought-provoking films without going too far and being arrogant.
That's my thoughts anyway!
| 2
|
wow. superb entertainment. weak start but it got better and better. what cap will do for bucky. felt he would have fought hulk and thor if they were present and on team stark (wonder whose side they would have taken). that last fight was so emotional - and brutal, unlike the hugely entertaining airport fight. a believable villain with a twisted plan. great cameos by spidey, ant man and hawkeye. a cool black panther. a dark secret. weak and under-cooked romantic subplot though and vision and wanda were a little dull in comparison but necessary. it lived up to the hype and was way better than ultron. russos are the no. 1 directors in mcu with winter soldier and this. looking forward to infinity war. hope they don't falter like whedon.
| 8
|
Although the series is great there are some aaspects i'd say could have been handled better such as the time hopping in each episode shouldnt have been so fluid that'd make some people(not me but some friends) question what direction the show was going in but overall i would say i see this series having alot of potential going forward and id tell anyone that repeat watching are a must if something didnt make sense to u in the first run especially if you're a binger like me
| 9
|
After Deeran, yet another highly impactful movie which gets elevated by Gibran's BGM. The antagonist detailing was so perfect and this Indian movie will surely give you goosebumps like hollywood thriller Seven etc.,
A must watch for any language viewer who loves psychological thrillers.
Thumbs up
| 9
|
The film was a total mess of random activity. There was no memorable dialogue, it wasn't funny, it wasn't moving, it wasn't thought provoking, it wasn't even escapism. It really was just 2 hours of total randomness thrown into a film.
It seems this film was just another on the recent multiverse bandwagon. The only difference was that this wasn't a Marvell superhero one. It doesn't make it clever though. How it won anything at the Oscars leaves me absolutely baffled.
There's not much more to say about this film other than, my advise is to avoid it and save your precious life hours for something else.
1 star for decent acting + 1 for some quite nice colours.
| 2
|
This is one of those movies that aims to be a feel-good all-American movie but I just didn't really care about the six hostages who are at the centre of this. I don't care for them because I didn't really know them. So when the music swelling and back-slapping and 'We did it!s' occurred I wasn't really feeling it. It didn't feel earned and I didn't feel like I was part of the party.
Plus it all felt a little bit silly. The attempt at 70s hairstyles and moustaches looked silly and the reduction of Iranians to zombie-like frothing at the mouth lunatics was fairly offensive. And I'm not even Iranian.
| 5
|
Johnny Depp must work a potent magic on his admirers: by its power he's able to communicate to them, and to them alone, the character he has it in his head that he's portraying. The rest of us have to do a good deal of guessing, since the actor goes only a little way in manifesting his purpose by means of the normal external signs, e.g. facial expressions, body language, tones of voice. Lacking these to go by, I hazard that in this movie he thinks he's impersonating a would-be buccaneer who's generally too drunk, lazy, incompetent, or good-natured to carry off his boasted predations: a role for a W. C. Fields or Wallace Beery, not a performer with the look and the aura of a spoiled altar-boy twenty years past his prime. The star's deficiency might have been compensated for in some measure by intelligent casting of the leading lady; but the one we have here is Keira Knightley, doing her usual, i.e. wanly striking poses for an imaginary photo shoot. The villain, Geoffrey Rush, supplies the color and panache the other two lack; but there's not enough of him to go around. The movie is rather at pains to present itself as a piece of good fun; but for me it was a piece of hard work, all on account of the director (the same one who bumbled up the American "Ring"). He appears to have one virtue: shooting all the script he has, so that all the pieces are there, as they often are not in films these days. But the pieces are nearly all wrong: in the staging, the perspectives and proportions are so far off what one might imagine in reading the script (or any of its published story-izings) that one almost has to revisualize the movie as it goes to get what it's about. And the script, which is a mishmash at best, is confusing in places. The first scene ends with the pirate ship bearing down on its apparent target...and then what? Pondering this enigma distracted me from subsequent developments for a good hour or so; not that they compelled much interest in themselves. I feel a gallon of ill will toward this movie: as a product for sale, which is all it is (it's a lot farther from being a work of art than the amusement ride that inspired), it's a piece of inferior merchandise, with its seams still unfinished. Yet buyers seemed not to see that. Depp's magic at work again?
| 2
|
I thought this was super cool when it came out. Definitely enjoyed some rewatches & started thinking "okay, maybe my favourite parts are the rotating hallway parts". But the other evening I watched it on mute. A good movie should make sense with no picture, and also with no sound. This is not the intended film experience, obviously, but it speaks to how each element has to stand on it's own. Okay? We're all good? I dare you to watch this on mute & not feel incredibly bored. What are we doing? I swear this man enjoys directing actors less than George Lucas. Ledger's Joker is an anomaly, in that it was such a committed performance, but than you have to consider how the entire production ignored Ledger's health issues. Where is the love? I don't think Nolan likes directing actors at all. The only clever concepts in his films seem to come from his brother. But it would appear that Nolan identifies as a clever film maker. Or high-brow. This is not 'Solaris'. What do I like about this film? ...the spinny bits. But that's Fred Astaire's thing! This is not an original concept. The only commendable aspect to any Nolan film is his high level commitment to practical effects. I truly love those aspects. This film had some gorgeous miniatures to establish locations I couldn't care less about. So yeah... good movie for a 15 year old who's getting into film. This is not high brow it's just noodling around with concepts while dudes in suits punch each other. I hope you enjoy it because I hope people enjoy things, but I have to say I did not enjoy it upon rewatch.
| 3
|
The easiest movie to make has to be a movie where you dont need to explain anything, and that is exactly what this movie does. No visible monsters, no explanation why they arrived, no explanation how they do stuff or why people goes mental, no explanation why some people can survive the monsters, no explanation why the survivors are happy, etc, etc... People are also going insane when looking, even when the monsters arent there... This was just rubbish, and I cant understand why people arent more critical.
| 2
|
I tried to watch Inception again on the TV one day, to give the movie a second chance, mainly since I lately discovered Tom Hardy and I wanted to see him in there.Tom Hardy was-as usual-a delight to watch, but unfortunately he was the only one not to be ridiculed by the stupid dialogues of this movie.I know Inception has many many fans, but I can' t really understand why.I suppose that many will tell me I did not understand the movie. I do not think I have such problems, especially with movies so naive and pretentious such as this total fiasco that instead of passing for masterpiece in film history should find its place in the panorama of biggest failures in film history, together with much more valuable movies that went overlooked.The way Nolan-who must take himself for a genius-heads for the dream world is superfluous, nonpoetic, mechanistic, and incoherent(he jumps from one idea to another leaving them all in suspense and we are supposed to buy that this reflects the nature of the plot).Perhaps his original idea was an interesting one but he needed a scriptwriter to make something of it.He preferred to do it all by himself, filling the story with clichés and dialogues so stupid that they are unbearable to watch and listen to.There is no philosophical background, only a pretentious plot that is supposed to mean something, and most of all it is aiming at impressing the audience, and in that it succeeded perfectly.I consider it a blasphemy to put Inception next to 2001 or Blade runner;instead I would suggest a comparison with David Cronenberg's Existenz;it's not Cronenberg's best film but it gives Nolan a lesson what messing with another reality means.Finally, I understand that these views I expose here are about to be the target of attack by many devoted fans.I can not but accept this position.
PS. I am heading for Intersterlar one of these days, I never learn;I already read people are in love with this movie too.I hope I fall in love too, but I have great reservations as I do not trust the director at all!I'll be back, however, with another review, since I've decided to fight for what I consider right these days(and to support great films I still have the pleasure to watch,like- very recently- the Judge and the Drop)
| 3
|
This movie is overrated because of good across. If there were other unknown actors in this movie then it would have had 1.5 max imdb rating overall. I enjoyed it because i was bored and because im a fan of resident evil so i'll give it 1/10 !
| 1
|
This has been my favorite show of all time. So sad it is over. Thinking I will just have to start back at the beginning. This finale was epic.
| 10
|
Very good ... The dose of tension, conflicts of interest, the most violent year seemed even calm in the face of everything we are going through, in Brazil and in the world, not only with regard to violence, but also the pandemic and troubled moments ... Excellent film , irregular and sometimes slow, but lovely ... A predictable but satisfactory outcome ...
| 8
|
The average viewer might see this film expecting a salacious treat for the prurient interests but the disappointment disappears rather quickly when they realize that they are watching an expertly crafted (TRANSLATE: HUNGRY!) script turned into a compelling photo-play. Sex, Lies and Videotape takes marital infidelity and sibling rivalry and turns the mixture into dynamite, with one James Spader as the fuse. The tiny cast is rock solid and perfectly matched and the dialogue is efficient and witty. Indeed, there are some lines in this film which will make you either guffaw, get hot and bothered or both at the same time and the process is repeated throughout. Peter Gallagher and sultry Andie McDowell are the dysfunctional couple, with McDowell's character a delightful study in Southern Belle turned frigid neurotic. Add one sly, sultry and slutty kid sister played magnificently by the luscious Laura San Giacomo and the story quickly reaches critical mass when it becomes apparent that hubby and kid sis are getting a little on the sly because wifey spends her time obsessing about suburban minutae and recoiling from her husband's amorous advances. Spader is the old college buddy who arrives in town on a mission to regurgitate the mess that was his past love life which he now uses as the canvas for his self-analysis via a videotape fetish involving a parade of women from coast to coast.
To say that he has "an effect" on the trio is more than an understatement!
Sex, Lies and Videotape is a classic example on how to properly make "a film" tell a story. It is utterly without nudity or special effects and yet you will feel like you've been rode hard and put up wet after seeing it.
See it with your best girl.
| 10
|
Technically it's good, i.e. the majority of the actors, the cinematography, the costumes, effects etc. are all fine - the Queen soundtrack, however, I found only partially fitting.
Anyway, I felt it was all in all too contrived. Except for Michael McKean (who is great here), it wasn't really funny, but rather abstruse, even childish. But there was nothing extraordinary about it that made this series stand out in any way.Of course the religions (mainly Christians) are taken for a ride, but not as sharp and pointed as Monty Python did or, for example, in the case of the confused angels and demons who absolutely want war, it was not depicted as pointedly.
One seems to be clearly targeting young people, which also explains many of the positive reviews, which refer to the book that their authors read when they were young. Perhaps you also have to be English to understand some of the references.
All in all, I have to say that it is not a series that you absolutely have to have seen, but rather one that you can watch on the side without having missed anything important.
| 6
|
I was never a CA fan. I always thought Iron Man was so much better and was always fighting with my brother -he was addicted to CA. So when we found out CA 3 was CA v. IM we got really excited. We were speculating on who was gonna win and kick the other's ass. We had seen EVERY trailer, EVERY spoiler to this day yet none of that really spoiled the movie for us.
Because it was un-freaking-believable, over the charts good. And, yeah, this is coming from someone who hates Cap America. It was well balanced, showcasing every hero's abilities giving them the time they needed on screen -no more, no less. The storyline kept going smoothly, having very small but clever cliffhangers between some scenes keeping us on the edge and I really have to congratulate the writers for that. Whoever says they did a crappy job with this movie they're just haters -don't listen to them.
This movie is not an Avengers one. It's focused on CA and his struggle to do the right thing. You can't really hate him, or hate IM. They both had some points in their arguments. By the end of the movie, I felt sympathy and love for both of them -yeah, even CA. So the characters were not ruined as individuals at all. I really like their relationship, their chemistry and their friendship -which, by the end, I realized was quite deep.
As for the debuts... BLACK PANTHER SLAYS!! He was skilled and strong and such a badass. I loved him and I'm so excited for his solo movie. SPIDER-MAN literally stole the show. We all know Peter is funny and goofy but that actor did a really good job portraying the character. He was a badass as well, but with a funny hint to it. IM and SM actually made a pretty funny duo. I'm so excited RDJ is set to play in the SM movie. And... CROSSBONES. Well, don't expect much from that douchebag. He's not much of a threat -he gets killed in the first 10' (oops! spoiler alert!).
CAPTAIN America and his hero hair were working overtime to save the world while trying to save his best friend. IRON MAN was trying to reason with CA and get Bucky in prison while using some new awesome tech that had our jaws dropping (not just the glove). BLACK WIDOW was kicking a lot of asses and ANT MAN was surprisingly awesome (I didn't really liked his solo movie) and hilarious as expected. ALL THE OTHERS were awesome as well as their evolving powers.
To sum up, it's a MUST WATCH. It was the BEST one in the Avengers/CA franchise. I can't wait for Infinity War 'cause it sets up a new world for the MCU.
GO. SEE. THE DAMN MOVIE. NOWWWW!!!
| 9
|
I've been hearing about this Netflix Original called Bird Box for a decent time now, spanning not only a challenge but what some people call one of the greatest films in awhile. To your dismay, I disagree.
Meet this lady who's pregnant when a strange force begins to make people suicide or go mad at a single glance at whatever the hell it is. With the force on the rise, she must live in this very very harsh environment while a series of unfortunate events begin to unfold.
I liked the pace of the half of the story that took place in the beginning of the outbreak because each scene was just as equally as fast paced as the next, but the half that takes place in the present got a little jiitered and clunky. Some parts of the present scenes seemed to slow and it's pace dramatically increased or decreased. I didn't like how there were a lot of time jumps and a lot of deaths were seemingly for nothing.
Also the ending was in a way how I predicted but the story at least tried to unfold itself in a way to keep the viewers learning what happened and why they're there in the present like that. Also I love how we never get to know about the origin of this force because, like Cam, it focused more on survival than the villain. If it was a prequel to A Quiet Place and they altered 40 percent of the story I'd be a little more interested but the outcome would most likely be the same.
Not the worst for Netflix but it definitely isn't the best.
| 6
|
I can't believe people are falling for this nonsense. 'Interstellar' is supposed to be a Science Fiction, and I don't see any science but only fiction. Emotions are delivered without the interruption of time, and the future of the humanity depends on whom you like better. Come on, this is not a science project for elementary school students. Compared to 'Gravity', scientific research and validation of 'Interstellar' are just... forgotten.
SF genre's primary step to success is that the director has to makes the audience understand the core concept; even just one concept is enough. Nolan tries to realize his vision of five dimensional space which can control the time as well. I got that one, but he jams up too many things, black hole, wormhole, gravity, human instinct, aging, and even some philosophical questions .... without any explanation. Inception was such a masterpiece because Nolan walks through the movie right along with the audience. This dream world in his head is actualized on screen, and the audience takes in, understands, absorbs, and lives in with characters in the movie because foundation, characteristics, advantages & disadvantages of his world are all well explained not by someone's lines but from enough actions and visualization. Nolan seems to become more arrogant 'you guys should already know this' kind of attitude. You can see more of his arrogance in his later work, 'Tenet', complex and ambiguous more than ever. Now, I'm not sure even he understands what he is saying. SOSOSO overrated because it's Christopher Nolan. Guys be honest, and assume that 'Interstellar' is released under the name of an unheard new director. Are you still going to idolize this movie?
| 5
|
Well, Maniratnam has proved his worth as a director. To be able to make a hero out of somebody like Dhirubhai requires great skills. Not to mention that he made an excellent movie even with Ms Rai in it. (why did he cast her in that movie - did he lose a bet or was that a contractual thing for casting Mr. Bachan? Or was Tabu unavailable?) At the end of the movie the audience are most likely to come to the following conclusions: 1. Guru is a courageous, in-your-face, kind of entrepreneurial genius. 2. People such as Guru are the key to the success of our country and to the elimination of poverty 3. Guru is a hero of the poor people fighting for them against the club going, golf playing, influenced by the west, rich clique who prevented others from coming into their group with the help of the license raj, 4. People who stand up against corruption are honest, good people but really who are we kidding, do we really need these jokers? and 5. a small side issue is that the role of good women is at the side of their genius husbands even when they are treated as start-up capital. However, these are my questions: 1. If the poor are poor is it really because they are either lazy, or scared, or simply idiots. I wonder what would Mohd. Yunus of Grameen Bank have to say about this? 2. According to the movie people like Guru benefited 30 million people. In a country of 1 billion is 30million that much? It is just 0.3%. Not to mention these "poor people" had to be people who were at least of middle class status and living in cities. 3. Yes, it is true that the license raj did fetter the rise of dynamic capitalists - but will somebody ever talk about those toiling masses of this country who work until death to make this country run and people like Guru trilionaires? 4. And will someone ever say anything against making heroes of not only persons who are geniuses at exploiting others but also those who take dowry? what happened to all that social conscience of ours? It makes me very sad when talented film makers such as Maniratnam make such movies. Miracles can happen and may be Maniratnam will find his conscience....someday....
| 10
|
As a huge QT fan that shares his love of cinema and is inspired by his life story, a movie with some of the most famous actors working in Hollywood today about a topic QT feels passionately about seemed like an instant classic waiting to happen. Unfortunately though, we are left sorely disappointed, having witnessed the weakest QT outing yet.
While no one can question the production quality or the research that went into this, and while he surely does show his adoration for the period, QT seems to forget that movies should have a plot, which he only seems to remember the last 15 minutes of the film. How many times must we see a montage of a character driving a car with great 60s music playing in the background? Or better yet, can we still have those but also have some plot sprinkled in between? And remember that rising tension that ends in ultraviolence that Tarantino is so famous for? Well we get neither here, or rather we get both, but in separate scenes, making the tension seem unnecessary and the ultraviolence undeserved.
And while the characters seem like they could have been very interesting if fleshed out, do we need to have all of these characters in the movie even if none of them seem to contribute to the (admittedly nonexistent) plot in any way? And I don't mind changing history at all, but then do we need to have all the participants of the actual event in the movie if we don't have the actual event? Do we really need to spend 20 minutes with an airhead version of Sharon Tate just so that QT can trick us by changing how the story goes?
Somehow this felt both like watching an indie director struggle to stretch a short film script into a feature length movie and like a collection of QTs vignettes to a time he cares for, and not at all like the Tarantino we came to know and love.
| 5
|
What a wildly ambitious, near perfectly executed piece of cinema. Greta Gerwig, Margot Robbie, Ryan Gosling, and company have made one wildly entertaining film. It's both mainstream and experimental, overtly political and intensely silly, sentimental and satirical, heavy and light, and hoo boy is it ever beautiful. It never stops entertaining.
Like this year's other great original film, "Oppenheimer" it deserves being seen at least once on a big screen so you can appreciate it as the artistic masterpiece it is. There is so much going on in the details, both in the "Real World" and "Barbieland" sections.
And that last line and Robbie's delivery of it? Killer.
There is just one fly in the ointment. That fly has a name, Will Farrell. I like Will Farrell when he's centered in the movie. But here he's doing his "Will Farrell, Silly Man" schtick and disrupts the flow. I think it would have been interesting to see Brad Pitt or Ben Stiller (in slow burn mode) or maybe even John Cleese in the role Farrell plays.
| 9
|
Looks like a low budget tv series, very bad acting. And the joke of the decade is that they were saying this is better than Game of Thrones hahah
| 3
|
A school of heroes? And it's funny occasionally too. So good the hype is deserved.
| 8
|
If you want to get yourself in the real terror that people lived that period, you should read the book. The film is like a walk in the park compared to the haunting descriptions of the real protagonists of the accident.
| 1
|
The film follows the life of Forrest Gump, a slow-witted but kind-hearted man from Alabama, as he recounts his life story to strangers while waiting at a bus stop. Despite his low IQ, Forrest unwittingly finds himself present at many of the pivotal moments in American history from the 1950s through the 1980s.
Throughout his life, Forrest experi. Picture, Best Director for Robert Zemeckis, and Best Actor for Tom Hanks. The film's iconic quotes, memorable scenes, and touching story have cemented its place as a beloved classic in American cinema. Picture, Best Director for Robert Zemeckis, and Best Actor for Tom Hanks. The film's iconic quotes, memorable scenes, and touching story have cemented its place as a beloved classic in American cinema.
| 5
|
It kinda lacks the glue between and some sparks and stuff. Its feel almost industrial, hearthless and cold. The only thing that has purpose and value is Toms team. Im gonna watch it again pherhaps in better quality and stuff. For the scenery. Nice to see Norwegian fjords in the end of the movie. Weard to see Kristoffer Joner fit into an early scene into the movie.
Anyways, i liked the previus mission impossible much better. This was like i dunno. they forgot something or missed on something. Kinda didnt make sense so it went kinda boring.. Fell asleep 2 times in 2 different days...
| 4
|
This is a must see show for everybody.Everything about this show is perfect and the Music is this show is a Perfect Artwork. Watch this with the person you love and it will strenght your love i promise.
| 10
|
Seems like this would have made a nice hour long PBS special but as a movie it was dull. The comparisons to Kubrick are blasphemous. This could have been a Transformers movie, another masturbatory exercise in special effects. We live in such an era of low expectations. No story here at all, just an excuse for reenactment of a noble part of a war. That's it. Nothing to see here. I was so disappointed.
| 3
|
This is terribly similar to "The Happening" and dare I say even worse because there is no backstory or resolution. It's like they ran out of money or time and forgot to finish telling the story. It gets 3 stars because of the cast, NOT the story.
| 3
|
If you liked this film you're probably a big TikTok user and following a bunch of influencers.
For actual movie fans the movie breaks a cardinal rule of cinema in that all of the characters are horrible and easy to hate.
I wanted them all to die as quickly as possible but sadly it was not to be. Instead we have to put up with Daniel Craig chewing the scenery and generally imitating the worst of amateur dramatics.
In a world of shallow fickle amoral influencers and social media donkeys do we really need a film where people portray more of the same?
This was awful and the "professional" critics drooling over it will be embarrassed in the future. History will not treat these reviews kindly
What a crock.
| 1
|
First thing I have to say, if you haven't watched the show yet, please go ahead without any hesitation, this is a masterpiece in fantasy and action drama genre. Production value here is mind blowing and acting is brilliant. Henry Cavill as Witcher is so convincing with his deep voice and his expression say a lot without uttering a single word from his mouth. Story will build very nicely till climax and you won't be able to stop watching. Some may have issue with two different timelines if you haven't played the game. This is the best thing NETFLIX has ever produced. Can't wait for season 2. :)
| 8
|
I will give marvel props for finally trying something new and Wandavision does take its unique aspect in full drive while offering a good tale of Wanda's own journey of grief regarding Visions death. That being said, the show is quite slow at the start and the ending is unfortunately a bit more of the same MCU beats we've seen before.
| 6
|
I initially seen advertised on Netflix but dismissed a few times then decided to give it a go... thankfully I did very addicting I just wish there was more episodes!
| 9
|
Spiderman 2 is one of the greatest movie ever.Comic book movies aren't so good.Well not all but some of them wasn't really that good.Just effects.Nobody tries to do something more that an immortal character who has very strange abilities and effects.Spiderman was the first one that did this.It showed Peter Parker as a person.We don't imagine Spiderman like a character who can't be killed anymore.And now the sequel surprised me in positive way.A wonderful movie.Just great.It even entered my all time Top 20.Now Peter works as i pizza deliver for the first 10 minutes of the movie.He had to be Spiderman till delivering a pizza in the other part of the town.He saved a lot of people but of course he didn't deliver the pizza in time and he was fired.It was sad when we understood that he had a birthday.Now he live with his aunt and they have a financial problems.His problems continues.Marry Jane marries other guy.Reason is that Peter was wait for her theater show.He had to save people again and when he arrived they didn't let him.The villain is Doc.OK.My all time favorite Spiederman bad guy.He is played by Alfred Molina.This is the plot and the movie is more than great.It is a drama and action together.Spiderman 2-Toby MacGuire,Kirsten Dunst,Alfred Molina,James Franco.I gave it 9.
| 9
|
There is a lot of action but in general the movie feels empty with no meaning at all
| 4
|
"Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri" offers a few laugh-out-loud moments, a nuanced performance by Woody Harrelson, some interesting plot reversals and unexpected developments. It's touted as a black comedy, but is not nearly as consistently amusing in its absurdity as "Burn After Reading," which also starred Frances McDormand and had a similar seriocomic tone.
Part of the problem is that the film tries to be relevant and political, touching on serious matters, such as spousal abuse, police brutality, unequal treatment of black suspects by police, vigilantism, political activism and other social issues. The cast is inclusive, with a sixty-year-old actress as the protagonist, blacks in two key roles, a dwarf and a character who may have repressed homosexual tendencies. It takes feminist digs at men who leave their wives for bimbos a third their age and seems to allude to some of the Obama-era consent agreements for police department oversight. It even has an extended scene that Snyder would term dog-petting, with a fawn. Frightfully relevant fare, but not particularly amusing.
To work all these diverse social issues into the story, the characters often behave in manners that make very little sense, if anybody stops to think about it. Unfortunately, the pace is a bit ponderous for much of the film and willful suspension of disbelief is routinely disrupted by excessive reliance on jiggly-cam shots, giving the audience ample opportunity to notice the incongruities.
The role that suffers the most is McDormand's Mildred, who sets out to right a grievous injustice, but commits a series of violent anti-social acts that make her seem nearly as morally bankrupt and contemptible as the individual she wants to bring to justice. She has received considerable praise for her performance as a strong woman, but her actions (including an incomplete conspiracy in the final scene), would seem to justify some of the invectives hurled at her character by the ex-husband, daughter, son and other characters. Her performance is largely single-note. Her character displays about as much remorse for her actions as the Only Black Lives Matter urban terrorists display for their acts of physical assault, arson and vigilante assassination. That the film tacitly condones her acts and this character is being singled out as some sort of cinematic role model is a sad commentary on society.
A good drama or comedy should have a strong moral. The protagonist should confront some obstacle that proves insurmountable until he or she learns some valuable lesson about life and somehow becomes a better person. The moral to this movie is stated in a letter written by Willoughby (Harrelson) to Dixon (Rockwell), but no character follows the advice. Mildred becomes more forgiving and patient in one aspect of her life, but perhaps not in another. Social issues, like police brutality and vigilante assaults on police officers are touched upon, but largely for comedic effect. Often, characters seem to behave in irrational manners in order to make some incoherent political statement.
McDormand also had a supporting role in John Sayles's "Lone Star," which was a highly effective drama/mystery that explored various social issues and which had a diverse cast. But the social issues were seamlessly woven into the plot of LS and presented from various viewpoints without bias. In TBOEM, the social issues seemed tacked on and the plot and character motivations seem contrived to highlight them.
Even the titular billboards seem contrived. Five thousand dollars per month would seem excessive, even for billboards in the heart of a city with slightly over a thousand residents. Considering that the billboards were disused and hadn't generated any income in several decades, she probably could have gotten the billboards for much less, perhaps as little as $100/month each or $250 for the three, and why wouldn't they accept it? (Why a city the size of Billings even has a company specializing in outdoor advertising is also a mystery.) Simple two-color printing job with no artwork. Pitch it as a PSA, get the price for vinyl sheets down to $500, if not for free. A couple of hundred to hang the sheets. Donald Trump could have gotten the billboards for a year for $5,000. But $250/month doesn't have dramatic weight, gravitas. At $5,000, she has to sell her truck and scrounging up the rent for the following month becomes a significant obstacle - not realistic, but significant.
But the filmmakers wouldn't want Mildred to behave like Donald Trump. Instead, she behaves like staunch fiscal conservatives regard liberals as behaving, by tossing excessive money at a situation others don't even regard as a problem; with no reason to believe the expenditure will produce any positive results, without even trying to get the best, most cost-effective deal or waiting for a quote before giving her best offer, and belligerently insisting on continuing the effort, even when the results seem to cause nothing but problems with no discernable benefit.
Rather than a heroic character, Mildred seems a cynical caricature of liberals.
| 4
|
I think they've stopped making good movies. So many letdowns lately. This one just milked a very simple premise, and it did it very clumsily, wasting a ton of star power in the process. I'd put this in the same conversation as Glass Onion. Just absolute junk.
They really could have made the movie more interesting and satisfying if they'd done more with the diners and their stories, not to mention the staff. And there were a few funny lines but lots and lots of room for more wit.
I guess it was a fine enough concept, but the execution was almost childish.
And yet again, the movie delivered a very bad ending in many respects. Skip it.
| 2
|
It is worth watching but the writing is kind of juvenile.
| 6
|
Only thing good about this movie is graphics. Characters are not developed well and are one dimensional. No reason given why main character is choosen for mission from whole humanity.
| 1
|
Dont recommend bringing your parents to this film, unless they are hardcore gamers. This is more for world of warcaft type of gamers, not GTA gamers.
| 5
|
As a movie.. It is a well organised and well displayed movie..I can't see any defect or n in the movie..its a full packed 5 star movie.. Bollywood needs these type of films..Thanks 'Aditya Dhar' for making this Masterpiece and putting all thr realities in the film so that we see what our soldiers has done for our motherland.. Jai Hind
| 10
|
Seasons 1 to 5 are incredible. Despite its limited plot (like I wrote in my review for its sequel: Live Another Day), it's a masterpiece of pace, storytelling, twists, entertaining and action.
From Seasons 6 to 8 the things changed. Season 7 is the only which is very good, close to the greatness for its riveting entertaining. But despite the show in fact was a let down, it always kept me hooked when other dramas didn't. I always wanted to see what happens next when any episode ended and some of the episodes of the show (even in the weakest season) are the best of the best in the TV history.
It deserved a better treatment in the later times, but then 24 was already a benchmark and a masterpiece of action and suspense. This isn't as perfect as other shows (see Breaking Bad), but deserves the greatest remember for all that times in which there was no Breaking Bad or Tue Detective or any other show or miniseries and just 24 was the best show of television. The bar now is rising (maybe too much and because of that Live Another Day has the things and the hype difficult) but was this show the one which started that.
10/10 (despie its weakness).
| 10
|
Tom Hardy is the only good thing in this film however The plot, effects, other charcaters and no meaning to the film lacks so much that it bogs down to a low score
| 3
|
I have never heard of The Witcher so when it was recommended to me, I didn't know what to expect. I was pleasantly surprised. It's quite dark but has the right amount of story and fantasy to make it interesting.
Season 2 is better than series 1. Yes it does jump about a little but I thought it was great watch. Lots of cool fighting and fantasy creatures.
It's not for everyone as Dirty Dancing isn't for me. If you like action/fantasy this is the best series I have seen since GoT.
Can't wait for series 3.
| 8
|
Matrix was a good movie for 1990 but comparing to new series on 2020 its just not 8.7.
And Glorified martial arts movie masquerading as a science-fiction thriller, this blockbuster hit struck a nerve with the public, though it isn't as brainy (or as deep) as one might be led to believe. Keanu Reeves is typically one-note as a computer-hacking loner who finds his life may not be reality--and that an alternate reality introduced to him by guru Laurence Fishburne could destroy him. Written and directed by the Wachowski brothers, who seem to enjoy a twisting story--though at the expense of logic (forget credibility). A more engaging leading man might have made the technical asides easier to wade through, although most audiences didn't seem to mind. Followed by "The Matrix Reloaded" and "The Matrix Revolutions", both in 2003.
| 4
|
This movie was given lots of praise by people in my life, so when I watched the film I wa southerly disappointed. The storyline of the river is much more interesting than all of the events that lead up to it. There are solid moments in the film and Sandra Bullock is amazing, but the film lacks and overall narrative and leaves the audience wondering what's next, but with no payoff. Oh, it's also not scary. At all.
| 4
|
First things first, this movie isn't shot as a movie. I explain: if you see the scene where Captain is fighting is enemy(scenes totally shown in the trailers), you'll see that Joe and Anthony Russo shot this film as something new, something revolutionary. Just a moment ago, i watched again and counted(I may have mistaken), 71 shots in that scene. This film isn't just taking itself seriously, it is a serious film, it really is. In the theaters, I was divided between fascination and incomprehension. Absolutely incredible. This is more than what I could have ever imagined. This is the best superhero film i have ever watched in my whole life, even better than The Dark Knight, which was already extremely good. This s pure entertainment for superhero fans. Conspiracies, betrayals, friendships, leaderships...But personally, this movie is a true source of motivation, the fact that they are "super humans", that their body steams regenerate, that their endurance is, like, four times increased, and that they simply have a better resistance to everything that hurts. Because a movie isn't just a pictures-gathering: it's a mentality that leaks through those same pictures, those characters, those stories. And that's what gives this film: a motivation, a true symbol of hope. Oh, and the music of Henry Jackman is so outstanding. Also, the technology here is wonderfully used. Everything is simply perfect!
| 10
|
Just surfing on the internet/IMDb came to know about this show and the moment i watched it ,the DARK atmosphere of this Show had me on the edge of my seat,The Mads mikkelsen is terrific ,This is one of my favorite shows easily.Season 2 was the most fast paced,filled of thrilled moments,Season 3 was a bit slow but series finale was the most unexpected and a beautiful ending.The brutality of the show is like pretty close to GOT.This easily is the most dark shows ever!HUgh dancy was so great in this show you actually are so much attached to him and one always try to know what is going on his mind,His relationship with Hannibal is beautifully Scripted and visualized.I just loved this show only complaint i had was slow paced season 3 and few of its early episodes (it had some silly moments which made no sense to me,were not so logical )but all in all this show is really Dark and a PERFECT Representation of Hannibal -THE CANNIBAL!
| 9
|
I know it's a lot of money, but man, it must hard to watch someone else destroy your work like this. Ready player 1 is a very creative and fun book. But, this movie... OMG, did they really need to change everything good about the source material? Common...
| 4
|
This show is like Coldplay. Once, innovative and emotional. Now, commercial and a poor reflection of itself. Charlie Brooker who writes this show is a genius. And in the past he has been utterly brutal and rude about the machinations of the media. So it is very ironic that his show, which was once radical and avant garde has now been bummed into PC servitude and half-baked nonsense by Hollywood. Black Mirror is dead. All hail Black Mirror, as reinterpreted by left wing Hollywood PC liberalists. The beautiful cynicism has been replace by political messages, wrapped up in interesting-ish plots. The sharp plots have been replaced with by the numbers chase scenes and clangingly obvious 'twists'. It is so obvious that the original scripts and ideas have been savaged by people with agendas beyond making great TV. That Netflix has decided to dilute what made it great and instead is trading on borrowed time - the first two seasons when it wasn't on Netflix. Oh well, the first series is still awesome.
| 4
|
The acting was terrible, as were the lines. The plot wasn't even hat interesting. I like most Marvel movies but this one was terrible.
| 2
|
Pffff......
Netflix these days has got a lot of financial, power, BUT that (unfortunately) does NOT equal CREATIVE power.
What's wrong with this movie? It sure as heck is BORING. And so it goes...
The bad: this movie has got NO soul. NO vibe. NO spark or punch. If your are cool with that, okay be my guest and watch it for yourself...
Netflix is not all bad for the cinema experience, but unfortunately A LOT of so called Netflix "movies" are pictures based on database searches of what are the most common preferences that most people (probably) like to see . The result? A BLAND and PREDICTABLE story from start till finish.
Is it all bad? Nope. The acting performances are okay. Edward Norton is always fun to watch. But even he cant save this movie from being BLAND.
Sorry, I honestly tried to like it, but it bored me from the start till the very end...
| 4
|
Trying to think of how to put a summary of Kung Fu Hustle into any long winded analysis is utterly impossible, this film is severely cool. This film is cooler than a polar bear with an intergalactic passport trying to get to Pluto on an ice propelled icicle. The film manages to work on so many levels, necessitating for all those viewing it. The essence of humanity and nobility is encapsulated throughout this story in a truly creative yet very simple manner. This is in turn fused with comic moments throughout the film which give it a traditional, and very effective, feel good factor. Which is exactly the wonderful thing about this film, is that it hits its targets plot-wise, precisely. What you expect to happens does happen, but perhaps in a different way than you thought. Stephen Chow, always elongates the plot revelation for a little longer than we're used to in this part of the world, and it is that which provides for engrossing cinema. Kung-Fu, contains that zany feel of "Shaolin Soccer", with Mr Chow amiable and convincing as his usual buffoonish characters, and yet also able to carry the serious side, ensuring the viewing audience connect with this film. Utter Brilliance. 'Shaolin' was very entertaining, but in a different way to this outing. Shoalin was out and out humour, it's subsidiary plot not as strong as the encapsulating football (or rather soccer for some), leaving it to be more of a tradition comedy-film. Kung-Fu is an action-comedy, in many senses of the word, but that's not enough, it contains the utter height of "coolness" in a very Die Hardish sense, yet leaves you emotive, much like the first time you finished watching Episode I. In tears. There aren't enough alliterative puns to make about this films, it's far too enjoyable to simply dissect, which makes it very hard to end a summary. It's just good. Very good.
| 9
|
I had high hopes for this movie but was sadly disappointed. The actors cannot be faulted and the performances were great. Unfortunately, the story and plot was too weak to call this a great viewing experience. It was fun to see Daniel Craig act out his 007 disguise though. I wonder what he has in store for us in the future. Edward Norton is also up and capable of so much more. Let's hope there isn't another sequel to this movie setting. Hope that Rian Johnson will soon come up with a completely new and original story that I can really work with. There is already too much recourse to old stories and successes from the past.
| 4
|
Can anyone tell me please what this fuss is all about?!! After reading the critics' reviews, I rushed to the movies promising myself an unforgettable night, but after the almost two-and-half-hour view, I was nothing but deeply disappointed!... Not because the movie is bad. Not at all! It was my highly raised expectations that came down to nothing.
The idea? Nice, but not new! It was differently treated in dozens of movies before. Treatment? Certainly interesting and catchy even though I think it was pushed a little too far. Plot? Filled with holes that can let a bus through. Direction? quite brilliant I have to admit, Christopher Nolan did a great job here. He managed to turn this could've-been-boring thriller into a dramatic action in which he keeps in touch with the human side of the characters along the way.
Another reason behind the success of Inception is the outstanding cast. Leonardo DiCaprio has completely departed from the sissy-like performance of Jack Dawson and has grown into a full-fledged actor to whom I respectfully raise my hat. Marion Cotillard was nothing but truly amazing! Without her, the movie would've certainly flunked. Ken Watanabe, Jospeh Gordon-Levitt, Ellen Page, Tom Hardy, and Cillian Murphy all did a great job as well.
All I want to say here is that the movie is surely enjoyable and worth the watch, just don't expect to see a phenomenon!
| 7
|
This movie has a great first half hour. And then that first half hour repeats itself. Some really horrible police work takes place that doesn't solve anything. Skip ahead ten years. Or twenty. Doesn't matter.
My point is that about ninety minutes of this movie should've been cut out. You think something great is going to come from one of the various 15 minute suspense building scenes, but nothing ever does. In fact, no characters even really mention the "significant" things that have happened earlier.
Bogus Just keep in mind most of the voters that are giving this movie 9 stars are under 18.
| 5
|
I just watched the entire first season in an afternoon and failed to give a single sh t about a single character in the entire show.
Who is anyone?
Where are we? What countries?
What is anyone's motivation?
Completely incoherent and hollow.
| 2
|
Just such a fun, witty, old school vibe show with great actors ( Steve, Martin and Selena are Fantastic!) With cool scenery ( NY, the apt. Building, etc) love the opening theme and song, just all around fun. My husband and I had to not binge, so we can savor the episodes. Can't wait until the next season.
| 10
|
Worst totally C class .. why netflix is pouring in millions for such C grade script.. totally boring and directionless kept waiting for something to happen waited till 6th episode gave it a thumbs down on netflix and will never ever watch the stupid witcher again.
| 1
|
It's a pretty simple story. A special forces mercenary takes on a contract to rescue the son of a drug lord who was abducted by a rival drug lord and kills an entire city's police force in the process. There is some cool gun action and some intense fight scenes but ultimately the whole thing is just another typical cliché modern Hollywood action movie. Except perhaps with slightly less 'badass empowered female' action, which was refreshing. There is a lot of violence, but it still felt watered down. It could have been way darker and edgier, which would have been more realistic too, but the main character was held back by the script. Being too nice and always honorable to even the most vile creatures and getting nothing in return. But maybe that is a metaphor for the Vikings of today, who knows.
| 7
|
Spielberg has never been amongst the more innovative and compelling of story-telling moviemakers and this sorely shows in this way overlong self-indulgent lazy movie void of insight nor any original nostalgia.
Technically competent melodrama. That'd be the only apt reason to watch it.
Everything about it appears and sounds cliched, seen and done before, and even if I were a Fabelman relative I would find it pretentiously showy and tiresome, at the end of which I'd give an equally pretentious polite clap-clap with a wry smile.
Plenty of bad lines, but a relatively good one would be - "sticking your head in a lion's mouth is balls, not letting the lion bite your head off is art."
Chug-a-chug, awards awards, empty empty, clap clap, next please.
| 5
|
Great film really well acted one of the first times i see deniro early on in his career. Love the edginess of the film. If you're cool with seeing that conflicts of race, sex, gender, power, and violence in the modern era are intentionally timeless because people can benefit from them, watch Taxi Driver for the first time.
| 4
|
It starts off alright, but with each episode trying to cram in multiple stories clubbing different set of characters, it just gets too much to be honest. Left it at episode 6.
I can't bear the thought of a finale that's 2 hours long.
| 2
|
Released in 2010, "Iron Man 2" naturally continues where 2008's "Iron Man" left off. With the knowledge that Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) is also Iron Man being made public, he must contend with serious heart problems, Daddy issues, alcoholism, a competing rat (Sam Rockwell), a mysterious new employee (Scarlett Johansson), a personal assistant who is now CEO and who also loves him (Gwyneth Paltrow), a friend who becomes a War Machine (Don Cheadle), Nick Fury of S.H.I.E.L.D. (Samuel L. Jackson) and a vengeful Russian with ties to his father's legacy (Mickey Rourke).
I like this sequel better than the popular original because I generally don't like "origin stories," as far as superhero movies go. More than that, "Iron Man 2" brims with confidence and is just full of kinetic entertainment from beginning to end, highlighted by a rockin' soundtrack and some curvy cuties, most notably Scarlett as The Black Widow (the character's film debut). On top of this, the writers add some meatier elements to the table, like Tony's father/son issues and his sad struggle with alcoholism (which comes straight from the 80's comics, the first superhero to be depicted with this problem).
The film runs 124 minutes and was shot in the Greater Los Angeles area of Southern California, Monte Carlo, Monaco, and New York City.
GRADE: A-
| 8
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.