Review
stringlengths 6
10.3k
| Rating
int64 1
10
|
|---|---|
Uncut Gems has been highly-praised by many, and even though I had a sneaking suspicion I wouldn't enjoy the film, I gave it a chance since it's streaming on Netflix. First and foremost, this movie was headache-inducing. There are so many scenes where people are all yelling at once, and talking over each other, it drove me crazy. I was struggling to follow anything that was going on, or who any of the characters were because they wouldn't shut up for even 2 seconds so I could make out a single line of dialogue. Almost every scene in the jewelry store was like this, and I'd frequently take a break from the film after one of these scenes just to decompress from the overstimulation of that chaos. Once they took a little time and started establishing an actual plot, I was at least glad that there was something I could follow. That's not to say I enjoyed the plot, though, because this isn't the kind of story that does much for me. Also, it wasn't just the chaotic dialogue that made the plot confusing, but the series of deals that the main character gets involved in started to overlap so much that it became impossible to track how much money he owed and to how many different people.
Therein lies the biggest problem I have with Uncut Gems. The entire plot structure is built around a guy who is entirely unlikeable (and fairly stupid) that constantly makes horrible decisions and digs himself into a deeper and deeper hole. The fact that he is so unpleasant sucks all tension and excitement from the film. It's obvious that the filmmakers want the audience to feel some type of stress as things come to a head in Uncut Gems, but I couldn't muster even an ounce of emotion since this is a guy who deserves to be beaten up or even killed. He cares about no one but himself, and hurts everyone around him. I've heard many say that Adam Sandler deserved some awards recognition for his performance in Uncut Gems, but I was struggling not to laugh as I kept hearing his other characters leak out in this performance. Sometimes he had a bit of Billy Madison or Happy Gilmore, and at one point I swear I heard The Waterboy and Opera Man coming out. There were many times that I was laughing during Uncut Gems, and I don't think they were intended to be comedic moments, particularly at the end. That conclusion was so fitting that I had a hearty laugh, and I almost turned a corner and thought it was a halfway decent film. Then I remembered all the things I hated before that and I don't think the end won me over enough. I can at least get a sense what others like about the movie, though.
| 3
|
If you make a sediesabout demons and angels you can expect contreversie but these writers didn't care that's what made this a good series sometimes it was a bit weird do and there won't be a season 2 but it is well build and i liked it a lot
| 8
|
My rating: 3/10
Lost in Translation suffers from having no central theme, moral, or fundamental message to communicate. If it were a mindless screwball comedy it could be forgiven this flaw; however, the movie does appear to have the pretensions of communicating some sort of deeper meaning. But the best moral of the story that I can come up with is: people in strange foreign cultures, cut off from family, will bond together and make some bad choices until their return flights depart. Hardly an earth shattering revelation.
Bill Murray does give a fine performance, and has several opportunities to showcase his ironic wit, especially when filming a whiskey commercial. The film also functions as an interesting Tokyo travelogue and an introduction to various aspects of Japanese popular culture, including the pachinko parlors, arcades, street youths, strip clubs, and Japanese television. Bill Murray's visit to an over-the-top gaudy Japanese talk show is another one of the highlights.
Unfortunately, the film's flaws outweigh the positives. Besides lacking meaning, the plot takes several illogical turns. Just when Bill Murray's character and the young married woman he meets appear on the verge of deepening their relationship, a much older floozy steals his affections for the night, which he instantly regrets. This prevents the film from developing into a love story - it's a friend story, and one in which the friends aren't acting terribly rationally. The young woman whom Bill Murray's character pursues is remarkably directionless; it's hard to believe that someone who graduated from Yale with a philosophy degree would be following her husband on a photo shoot assignment, listening to pop psychology motivational speakers, and crying over her experiences in a Japanese temple. Some of the humor is more clichéd than funny, especially the ditzy blonde American actress.
By contrast, Groundhog Day, which is a more mainstream film, was not only much funnier, but also had a message to communicate, about how one should conduct one's life.
| 3
|
I didn't read the books, marginally up to date with games and this show is trash.
Season one was fun, stupid, but fun. Had a banger song.
Season two - they started to actively avoid everything that worked in season one.
Season three is complete dumpster fire. Who is doing what and why? Wild Hunt is like one scene, everything else is garbage tier political SyFy level quality drama.
They did most of the things wrong from season 2 and onward. Plot is cringe, characters are cringe.
They should just end this here, no one wants two more seasons (at least) of this and now with different main actor. Not to mention even worse spin offs - like Blood whatever or recently announced Rats.
No, sorry Nettflix, no. Bye.
| 3
|
This is one of the few movie with good content since based on true events. The good thing about movie is it doesn't have typical Bollywood style Melodrama or Unnecessary stardom. Ajay Devgan beautifully plays his character and one of the good thing about it is its dialogues. They are short and smart throughout the movie. Except for few unnecessary and forced songs inserted at critical time, the movie keeps you engage till the very end.
Good points:
Story is too the point
Short and smart dialogues
Good acting, no melodrama
Not so Good points
A good movie for one time watch. A good experience. It leaves you feeling pity about how people are so gullible someetime.
| 7
|
6 minutes of credits sums this joke of a programme up marvels lost a step here 😴
| 8
|
Really good story telling, great cast and a great show up until it all gets ruined in season 3. Then devolves into a wokefest of bad writing, cliché filled nonsense with the most predictable story ever. Stick to the first couple of seasons then stop.
Downvote all you want. The series is trash now and will get cancelled much like westword because of the woke crowd. Well done alphabet crowd.
| 7
|
On a Technical level (sound, editing, effects, ect.) it's fantastic. It all looks and feels incredibly authentic (except for the perfect looking town next to the beach should be bombed out and the shore should look like it has more than 1,000 background extras inhabiting it).
The film fails in it's characters and the way the story is presented. I feel nothing for any of the characters, they feel like empty vessels. and the film has 5 stories all intercut with each other, and they each take place during different times of day. It's weird and I found it garring.
It's a solid "meh"/10
| 6
|
The only reason movie is getting bad ratings is because David O Russel is trash. Hollywood needs to stop giving abusers money to make money.
The movie has a great cast - so many A listers. Plot is amazing, movie itself is awesome. Fun, so much laugh and one or the best works or Christian Bale.
Margot Robbie and Rami Malek are my favorite actors and seeing them playing siblings is amazing. And you, people are being too hard on Taylor Swift, yet I could name many singers-turned-actors and even real actors who are way worse. Taylor ain't that bad.
Yet, I am very disappointed in Margot, Taylor and Anya for working with David O Russel.
Also I find it unfair that other movies by that man have good ratings even tho his allegations were around since 2011. The actors have won Oscars for his movies. But critics decided to be "woke" now. You were giving this man good ratings, but since more people hate him now y'all decided to be fake woke.
| 6
|
I'd never really enjoyed the original show past its opening theme. The actors will come into their characters soon, I'm 5 episodes in and there is vast improvement from episode one. Guaranteed Dr. Smith is still unlikable. And the parents are more what one would expect from space travelers rather than the Ward & June Cleaver that we got with the first one. If you are gonna reboot a show this is the way to do it.
| 8
|
If lazer tag with hack writers sounds like your idea of a nice Friday evening then good for you. I, a man of taste, prefer to shovel baby feces into my mouth and scream at my dog
| 4
|
I've gone from a 9 in season 1 to a 6 in season 2 to a 4 season 3. Very little makes sense in the latest series, and if not for Henry Cavill, I'd give it a 1. The show makes so many wrong terms and unnecessary situations that are unneeded or make the show unenjoyable. We've taken the Witcher in the wrong direction. I need more monsters and battles that make sense to me.
They need to focus more upon the main three (especially Geralt), and not so much the supporting cast. The show now lacks character and direction, and there seems to be a lack of gallantry for some of the characters. They have forgotten what their goal is.
| 9
|
Don't judge by seeing any negative reviews here.
Just go and watch definitely you will be entertained by Stranger Things.
And
I like Millie Bobby Brown very much (Eleven)😘 She is so gorgeous and especially I watch this show to see Eleven...She attracts me show by show. Her smile no words to describe that So so so beautiful 😍😍😍
| 9
|
Doesn't eat or shave for days but has the energy to run the equivalent of several marathons without any facial hair growth. Soldiers coming from trenches without a spec of mud. Shame on you Mendez.
| 2
|
So 43 minutes in and so far we have about that many lines of dialogue making for zero actual story. I will say that the fight scene that I paused to type my thoughts so far is probably the best knife fight I can remember ever seeing in a movie so kudos for that. To bad they ended the way they did totally ruined that fight scene. Next oddity, why does this kid keep trusting Hemsworth? So we have in this story a typical troubled hero with something in his past that haunts him and drives him to make the choice that ultimately kills him but also makes him a hero. We have the innocent caught in a world he does not belong in and completely out of his element. We have the woman who loves the hero from afar and has never had the courage to act on her love. We have the trusted henchman that double crosses his boss only to be destroyed in the end. Finally we have the evil tyrants on both sides spreading hate and death for selfish reasons and greed in this case as often is the case two warring drug lords. 60 minutes, I am getting a bit bored of the same old same old. Oh my, the old friend, I just paused again, I am gonna guess that the old friend betrays him and tries to make an excuse about how he has to survive or they came to him and threatened his family or something like that. Watch it to see if I am right. 1:21 unforeseen twist, not completely unpredictable but I did not see it. Final thoughts; Randeep Hooda aka Saju is a fantastic action actor and I really enjoyed watching him in this movie and hope to find some others he is in that I can watch. Hemsworth does an admirable job of playing an operator or special forces or whatever you choose to call his past roll. We knew how the movie would end, however, that does not mean I or we should be happy about this, it was a bullstuff ending and frankly lost a star from me over the ending itself. (Yes I know this was based on someone else's work, a graphic novel, so what it is still bullstuff.)
| 6
|
Film revolves around various psychological stimuli triggered by a lighthouse. Characters are dull and there is not much to tell about the story.
| 3
|
I wasn't really sure what to expect going in considering I didn't care much for the '98 movie when I was a kid. It's definitely a slow burn and i really liked what they did with the Robot. Don West is probably my favorite and reminds me of Han Solo. I recommend watching it. The only complaint would be maybe shorten it from 10 to 8 episodes.
| 8
|
In my opinion the best of Toby's Spiderman's and arguably the best overall. The storyline is well developed and with a surprising level of emotional depth. Action and CGI work really well.
| 9
|
One and only extreme psychological movie.... It disturbed me for a week.
| 10
|
The only thing I liked about this movie is it's background score. Everything else about this is an expensive repackaging. Nothing more. Yes, yes, the whole Africa angle is cool, but what's with S.Korea and Marvel. I don't get it.
| 4
|
I wasn't initially enthusiastic about this but having watched the first three episodes today, I'm very excited about seeing the rest. If you decide to give it a try, watch at least through episode 3 before you conclude - episode 3 is awesome! Compares VERY favorably to GoT. I like the fact that although it's a sprawling epic, there is a tighter focus on a few central characters. Magic is a more significant element than it was in GoT, to good effect. There are occasional aspects of contemporary culture that I found incongruous and distracting, but that's growing on me.
| 9
|
So boring!!! The acting is terrible! Story is confusing!
| 2
|
Chutiye ko feedback ka meaning sikhna padega. He is being rude to most of them .
Looks like he is stuck in a situation where I felt karma is acting upon him . Anyways let's leave it to karma. Im sure this chutiya will face consiquence.
| 1
|
Animated kids cartoon movie, no strong story, old and weak script serve with hight ticket rate to make public fool, seems we are watching NGC channal in animated form, extended long movies without any sense.if the film will earn money no suprise due to advertising and false scripted promotion. I wasted my INR1000 IN IMAX 3D, but you guys can be lucky to save your time and money. No much 3D effects, nothing is reality, all are graphics and computer work, nothing suprise in this movies, director tried incash the popularity of the 1st part. Not upto expectations. Feels like cheap quality Chinese movie watching in high rate.
| 2
|
Does anybody remember "The Creature From The Black Lagoon"?
Maybe this one should have been it's sequel and subtitled "Gill Man Gets a Boner"
A waste of time. YUUCK!
| 2
|
I have watched all of and only season 1. This will not be a balanced review, but instead, i will mostly warn you not to watch (most of) the season and give my reasons for that.
I recommend watching episodes 1 and 2 and skipping the rest of the season. The first two episodes were amazing. They were so good! The premise is amazing too.
The rest of the season is plagued with first: very many slow, unnecessary, predictable and uninteresting scenes. While the first two episodes were packed full of story, the rest of the season had many to me uninteresting minor character specific conflicts, a predictable main conflict, and was overall lacking story (that impresses).
Second, the season is abundant with many of the characters making dumb or unintelligent decisions, which made the story harder for me to believe and left me frustrated many times.
You might decide to watch the whole show anyway because: you like superheroes using superpowers. Well: the characters do not act like heroes, and you won't get to enjoy seeing powers used in interesting ways. Maybe you like to watch a team of superheroes: well, the characters unfortunately don't act as a team for a big part of the season. Maybe you like the theme of time travel: well, there is nothing interesting about the way time travel is used in the story. It is mostly used as a plot device, so I would not call this a story about time travel or a time travel story. Maybe you like the idea of exploring what it is like to live a regular life while having superpowers: While this topic is being touched, I do not think this is what the story is about.
They could have done so much more and so very different things given the powerful premise. I was hoping the show would surprise me and reward me with a great conclusion of the season, but the show does not substantially improve in its final part. I still give the show a 7 for a great premise, for the excellent first two episodes, and for a couple of figuratively beautiful scenes, including at least one in the final episode.
| 7
|
Wes Anderson is undoubtedly one of the finest directors we have working today, and this is very much evident throughout the span of his latest film The Grand Budapest Hotel. His choice of adjusting the screen format, his color pallets and sleek cinematography are what save this movie from being a flop. Yes, it is great directing. Yes the performances, especially Ralph Fiennes, are top notch. This is a decent movie, but decent is where it stops. It doesn't have anything to separate itself from previous quirky and dark humor filled films that Wes Anderson has released, it doesn't have the heart from Moonrise Kingdom, the charisma of The Fantastic Mr. Fox, or the mystique from The Darjeeling Limited. Yes, every director may have their own styles and tweak it differently for each of their works, but Wes Anderson only adds some minor plot differences to his films to make them slightly "different," yet still far too similar. I have been fine with them in the past, but by The Grand Budapest Hotel, his fourth main entry, the goofy style becomes a little tedious and actually difficult to get through in some scenes. Many trivial things are presented as important matter in drawn out sequences, making it all the more difficult to watch. Yes, I am harshly bad mouthing this movie, but I did still find some enjoyment in watching the gorgeous film making and the once in while funny script, but come the third act, all the twists just become much too predictable, and ultimately unsatisfying. I hope Wes Anderson has something up his sleeve that can add variety into his collection, because my patience level for this is slowly declining. GRADE: C
| 4
|
It's a well woven tale, note I've not read the books. References to actual historic people and modern day approach is really captivating. Beautiful to watch cinematography is fabulous. There's a Monarch who I would have loved to meet too Diana!
| 9
|
I don't understand the appeal for this movie....
It's watchable sure, but not worthy of the praise it gets imho.
| 6
|
One of the worst movies I've ever had the displeasure of watching. It has terrible actresses filling in masculine roles (who would've thought?), with some decent acting on the male counter parts.
It's another, weird gender-swap thing, where the Amazon, a female warrior folk living on an invisible island, attempt to defeat the devil. The action scenes are made up of Drangonball-esque, Super-Sayan style Gal Gadot doing her super hero thing - with a lame and cringy vibe to it.
Hopefully, this under qualified actress and the writers don't ever take part in the excellent Avengers movies.
| 2
|
I just started watching because I heard about this show in so many places, and I got curious. I didn't expect a lot from it since it IS, after all, a Nickelodeon show produced for kids. Nevertheless, I must say, this "kid's show" made me completely nerd-out on it. I just couldn't stop watching! The psychological complexity of the plot and characters reminded me a lot of Pixar and Hayao Miyazaki's films (so if you are a fan of both, definitely watch this show!). I really enjoyed how the characters developed over the episodes and the constant focus on solving personal and inter-personal conflict (and not just in means of physical battle). Highly recommended.
| 10
|
Dr. Strange made a huge mistake during his spell because SpiderMan was interrupting him, both were acting like irresponsible kids and here comes the whole movie. Everyone was acting like a kid. Any award in acting category will be nonsense.
| 2
|
I love the first season although it relies heavily upon nostalgic homage . It manages to flow well and you care about the characters and Mike and Eleven are the standouts .
I also enjoyed the score in both seasons.
Season 2 felt almost like a reboot of the first season and really didn't add much for me to the series and not sure I'm excited for the new season .also mike suddenly seemed to not matter as much .
| 8
|
If you're reading this before you watch, this is not your normal run of the mill super hero show. Its kinda like Watchmen meets Mystery Men....but darker way darker. Not to be watched with kids.
| 8
|
I was done after E1 but watched through E4. Gratuitous use of the F word was the first thing to turn me off and certainly adds nothing to the viewing experience. Steve Martin is usually funny and enjoyable to watch. Not so in Only Murders in the Building. Martin Short is not funny nor enjoyable to me and he continues his completely blah and forgettable acting in this production. Selena Gomez is okay. Big name actors all muted by the poor dialog, story line and directing.
After four episodes and there is nothing that keeps me interested in watching the next episode. The plot, murder in the main character's apartment building, is lost behind extraneous the yawn fest of each episode. No character, including the murder victim, draws me in to caring for them nor understanding about them. Everyone is completely forgettable and uninteresting.
Once again an 'Original' series which is just left behind and forgotten.
| 3
|
I really can't understand how this title is 8.4 (at the time of this review)!
When I read one guy describing it as "poor man's Game of Thrones" I expected a great low budget fantasy drama. I found the exact opposite!
Acting! OMG!!! I can't believe I watched full season of 3rd grade elementary school stage show level acting! Even Henry Cavil, who possibly carried the entire show, was "good" at best!
Dialogue is mediocre, nonsensical, half baked, and unconvincing
CGI: Not terrible, which means: Bad!
Music: Mostly annoying
Character development: What??
Plus: Cheap unnecessary nudity, just to grab some attention
Save your time and go watch the grass grow, much more interesting!
| 1
|
I'm a big fan of all things Witcher. It's just a tremendous series that stands unique in a sea of medieval style fantasy. Geralt is one of the best protagonists of all time and the world he inhabits is complex and compelling; but especially dark.
However what makes it work is that it's also lighthearted and funny. The best adaptations find a way to balance that aspect. Not making Geralt a Mary Sue or a cliche stoic hero of legend and allowing the rest of the cast to have their spotlights.
And the show does a great job at all that. It maintains a lot of the darker depressing elements the series is known for while being good for a great laugh. It's often hopeful but also depressing.
And Henry Cavill is perfect casting. Not only is he eliciting new feelings in every straight man watching this, but he completely gets the vibe. He is simulationiously badass and likable while also not being infallible. He makes mistakes, gets beaten, and can be a real selfish jerk sometimes.
His relationship with Ciri is a highlight as well. She's a great character and Freya Allen does an excellent job portraying her; showing her struggles of being a young girl with such a huge unwanted burden but also making her enjoyable to watch. Geralt going from reluctant babysitter to father figure is well done and feels natural.
The entire cast is mostly excellent. Joey Batey as Jaskier is a standout. He steals every scene he's in and it's extremely entertaining watching him try to break down Geralt's stoic demeanour. And the subtextual romantic relationship he may feel for Geralt is well done as well, with his breakup songs being bangers.
The only thing I did not like was Jennifer. I don't think it's the actresses's fault, I think it's the writing. She was compelling as pre "fixed" but just kind of became a selfish and entitled jerk afterwards. I know that's the point and eventually she comes around somewhat but I think it's just more aggravating than interesting.
But I blame that on a lot of writer's that have trouble depecting a strong but flawed woman while making her likable. It almost always falls into "b word" territory.
The set designs, special effects, and direction are great as well. It really is a good looking show. Even in the first season when it's going for more of a 90s monster of the week fantasy show vibe still has a lot of charm to it.
I can't wait for season 3!
| 9
|
Okay. First, let me confess, I didn't want to watch it because I've a little 'uggghhhh' feeling inside towards zombie-type movies, maybe because they don't make sense at all. That's why I find most zombie movies as silly. But Stranger Things, wow, this is not like conventional zombies v/s human world movies but rather more advanced & immersed version of that.
Stranger Things takes you back to the '80s where a couple of friends & families of Hawkins, a fictional town based in Indiana, becomes the victim of a flunked scientific experiment carried out by Hawkins Lab. Right from the Season 1, it got me hooked in & completely invested in the story. All lead characters are well developed & are amazingly played by the actors, you may end up get attached with a few & start feeling what they are feeling. I loved the talented child crew that plays Mike, Justin, Will, Eleven, Dustin & Max. They are the real elegance of the show & infuse the right amount of charisma & banter.
The show maintains its unpredictability, thrill & horrors for the first two seasons. Few moments might also leave you on the edge of your seat & get your fingertips cold. But Season 3 is, what I personally think, where the show starts taking off. It's filled up with lots of things which hardly make sense including the non-seriousness in a very tense situation, children playing the role of agent 007 & the monster which reminded me of zombies which I already mentioned I hated. S3 stayed predictable as well most of the time. Still, I loved it all the way through. Loved the ending which was relatively sad.
It's must-watch stuff if you love being startled. Stranger Things is scary, fierce, thrilling, and will leave your heart pounding in the chest. I would keep it at 9/10.
| 9
|
The first thing to say about this production is that it is beautiful to look at, especially in UHD. The dreaming spires of Oxford are without doubt the stars of the show. Unfortunately, although the visuals are breathtaking, the editing is clunky and the writing cliched and lacking in the intensity of the - rather intrusive at times - soundtrack.
Matthew Goode is well, good. He's perfectly cast and has all the mannerisms and snark that you would expect of a vampire. Teresa Palmer unfortunately, although she does her best with her stilted dialogue simply isn't believable as an internationally acclaimed academic. The problem with being introduced as the youngest person ever to obtain tenure at Yale, is that you need to act and speak with a level of intelligence and authority that makes this real. Palmer just doesn't have the delivery or the gravitas required, as demonstrated in one of her earliest scenes when she delivers a lecture which sounds like it was written by a teenager who forgot to do their homework and dashed something off 10 minutes before class.
The main problem however, is that the opening episode simply tries to do too much too quickly. This would have worked so well as a slow burner, where the characters slowly reveal themselves over the first few hours of the show and we learn about their struggles with the identities they hold. Instead we are spoonfed everything in the first 30 minutes with awful, rushed exposition as the main characters all but point at each other and say "You're a witch", "And you're a vampire" in the most hamfisted attempt to get things moving forward.
I've never read the books, so I can't comment on the quality of the source material, but I can only assume that given the luxury of several hundred pages the story unwinds in a careful, intelligent and well paced manner. It's a shame that the creators of this show didn't take the same approach.
| 5
|
Without the visuals this would be a 5 star rating. Predictable till the end,
Nice Visuals / Boring story
| 6
|
When I first started to watch ONLY MURDERS I couldn't get into it..,After a few days I went back to it and glad I did..,it really got better and I was hooked. Steve Martin and Martin Short have worked together and have been friends for decades..,they play off each other effortlessly. Selena Gomez was very good and fit into the crime solving trio perfectly.. I found myself watching episodes over again because I enjoyed them so much and found them extremely entertaining..,I could have done without some of the actors they introduced as cameos.. I'll let you decide that for yourself.. the murders they solve are interesting as they unfold and you will find yourself surprised.. I'm all caught up and on Season 3.. I've enjoyed watch this show so much and it is one of my favorites.. hope there will be more seasons..,
| 8
|
As a woman it's good to finally see such a huge response to a female directed and starring movie. However as a movie, this just really didn't do it for me. Acting wise, these superhero movies aren't Shakespeare, but I do not believe Gadot is a good actress. I also didn't find the villains to be that intimidating or scary. I know Hollywood is going to continue to give us these female driven movies but I'd like to see one that pays just as much attention to the story/plot/acting as they do the cultural significance.
| 4
|
I was going into this thing thinking it was going to be just a remake of the TV show or even worse, the movie. It's not. Much in the style of how Battlestar Galactica was reimagined. It's gritty and real. All the wonder and hold the campiness. I think what I love the most about this is you get to see the depth of every character. Fantastic acting and writing in this series. More please!
| 9
|
WHY IS THE DAD ALWAYS ON FACETIME. Also, what is entercourse?
| 3
|
If you like trash-comedy films + kung fu this is the movie for you. It's very funny although as long as the plot moves it become a little more action based.
| 9
|
I love movies! Happy movies, sad movies, comedy, action movies... All of them. As much as watch sad movies this movie was the only one that made me cry. The acting in this movie is superb and the meaning behind it is even powerful. I really recommend watching.
| 7
|
I hated The Matrix. Saw it when it first came out, in a multiplex where I also saw The Corrupter with Chow Yun-fat, which I loved. Two different eras and styles of movie making. The new and the old. Special effects and thematic BS vs a real story with believable characters.
I know, I know, I'm old-fashioned. So be it. When Keanu Reeves is dodging bullets in hyper-space and goofy-time, I felt like dodging out the door. I always tell my friends that when people in the movie start flying through the air, I start flying out the door.
I have a friend I love dearly who started a discussion group about whether we all live in a matrix, whether the life we think we know is all fake. Oh, Lordy, what a colossal waste of time. To me. Not to her and not to modern audiences.
Oh, well, time marches on. Onward into the matrix, friends and neighbors. Think I'll stay right here, in good old-fashioned reality, whatever that is.
| 2
|
Excellent who done it? But.......Loaded with Hollywood politics takes away from a very descent movie. People go to the movies to escape, not be indoctrinated. Good try though.
| 6
|
Civil War is a masterpiece. And in my opinion the best marvel movie. Just like get out I watched this movie when it came out in theaters and I still love it. Captain America and iron man had been in a good amount of films and had dealt with their hardships. So when this movie came along there decisions have a purpose. This movie has some qualities that I wish more movies had. It has really good dialogue. Characters sit down and talk and it just feels organic than usual. It's mostly because of the energy the Captain America movies have. This movie makes these characters feel real and that's awesome because it gives the universe a nice change of pace. There are other great stuff. Great acting. Great script. Has some of the best action. If I could think of any issues I would say the music. I don't like how marvel changes the score of the films, people made videos of that. I also really don't like the shaky cam it's a headache. The villains plan is also pretty dumb and complicated. But these problems aren't too bad so I can let go of them. This is the movie that made me a marvel fan so I have a huge attachment for it.
| 10
|
So as many people would agree that the original Disney lion king is a masterpiece which is beloved by, young and old.
This on the other hand is some what lack lustre, the visuals and the sound are incredible, and I appreciate sticking to the original story so faithfully, but ( and it's a big but) ultimately this remake lacked the charm is the original.
I didn't fall in love with the characters, there was a distinctive lack of humour, and the dialogue lacked the gravitas of the original. It's not necessarily the voice acting that lets the movie down, but the script and delivery are very poor.
My advice, just watch the cartoon. (I'm not falling for any more of these Disney live action remakes, I would rather keep my money and watch the originals).
| 4
|
I'm two thirds of the way through this movie and despite the fine acting chops if its cast, the pace of this thing is dragging. A missed opportunity. This could have been a different movie if the editing had been better.
| 2
|
In Hindu mythology, Ramayan is the most popular story ever told. And when it comes to Ramayan, then its not just Ram, Laxman, Sita and Ravan. There is also one more important character in the story - HANUMAN.
Hanuman - who leaped for the sun thinking it to be a was a sweet fruit Hanuman - who was blessed by the GODS with supernatural strength Hanuman - who flew across mountains and leaps across the oceans Hanuman - who is the mighty warrior, the destroyer of the wicked
Since the silent movies era, there have been number of flicks made on the Ramayan and its characters but never before has there been a full fledged animation movie around the story.
The highlight of the movie is that it is India's first ever animated movie based on Hanuman's life and takes the viewer through Hanuman's birth till the great victory over Lanka. The movie talks about number of extraordinary feats that he displayed since his childhood through 100 minutes of world class animation. The movie boasts of 40 characters and 200,000 individual images that resulted in the movie Hanuman, which is directed by V.G.Samant and has Mukesh Khanna providing the voice-over for Hanuman.
| 7
|
I laughed (at the sheer preposterous belief system that some people embrace), I cried (over the fact that some people think this is based on reality), I threw up into my mouth a lot (at how extremely bad this film is...). Avoid, unless you are an adult who still believes in ridiculous fairy tales, and then there a lot of wonderful cartoons that I could recommend to you.
| 1
|
Inception, about the business of invading dreams and stealing secrets, is overbaked, complicated, and tough to endure in spots. It's crippled by overexplaining itself and by changing the rules it sets out for itself when convenient to the plot. Still, a strong supporting cast (behind the vapid Leonardo Dicaprio) helps considerably.
Dicaprio plays Cobb, a man whose job it is to invade people's dreams and steal their secrets. (It stands to reason that he's also The Very Best at this.) Cobb operates outside of the United States because of a terrible incident in his past, and he's been looking for a way back without facing any negative consequences. A Mr. Saito (Ken Watanabe) has a job for him, with a proposal: if Cobb is successful, Saito will have his longstanding charges dropped with the proverbial one phone call. But, of course, there's a catch: rather than having Cobb steal an idea from their victim, Saito wants him to plant one, an act known as "inception," an act that is deemed nigh near impossible to accomplish.
Cobb assembles his team: his partner Arthur (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), the architect Ariadne (Ellen Page), the forger Eames (Tom Hardy), the chemist Yusuf (Dileep Rao). Their mission: enter the dream of the heir of a major corporation and plant the idea that he wants to strike out on his own rather than take over the company when his nearly dead dad kicks the bucket.
As with most Christopher Nolan movies, this one takes some careful scrutiny. It's not that the plot is convoluted, precisely, it's more that there's not only a lot of things going on in rapid-fire motion, and the entire movie is set against the backdrop of an area that virtually no one knows anything about: dreams. Because of the unfamiliar territory, the filmmakers can do almost anything they want within the movie, within the dream within the movie, and within the dreams within the dream, and so on.
Nolan establishes some rules from the start, because his audience naturally would have no idea what they might be (for example, if you die in a dream, you wake up; in order to come out before the dream is up without dying, you need to fall somehow). Then, over the next couple of hours, he violates those rules a few times. In other words, the rules are X, but because of this situation in which we now find ourselves, all bets are off. It's kind of easy to write your way out of plot predicaments when you can change the rules at any time and for any reason.
This is an issue that plagued Dicaprio's last movie, Shutter Island, a movie that depended on the audience being able to suspend disbelief. That's crucial here as well, but the nature of what we're supposed to disbelieve keeps changing. It's tough to completely respect a movie that needs to move its own goalposts.
The cast isn't terrible, but it's largely lost under a sea of story intricacies, wild CGI, and a lot of blaring music. This is a minor complaint, honestly, but there were multiple scenes in which characters were speaking to one another in normal tones while the movie's soundtrack was ratcheted up to 11, thus rendering the dialog completely indecipherable. For a movie that's so highly dependent on plot, this was irritating and really inexcusable.
But back to the cast. Both Gordon-Levitt and Page seemed out of place, in way over their heads. Gordon-Levitt's character probably should have been played by someone more skillful, like Mark Ruffalo or James Franco; Page looked like she just wandered onto the set of another of her Comcast commercials, and she's not yet been able to shed her Juno MacGuff persona. Page, like the rest of the cast, is game but is ultimately along for the ride, nothing more. Also on hand is Marion Cotillard as Cobb's dead wife who appears to him in dreams as sort of a projection, and that's where the weirdness begins; he's defensively locked his memory of her in his subconscious, so of course she pops up every time he goes into someone else's dream. That can be a bit of a drag.
I'm still firmly in the camp that believes Leonardo Dicaprio often confuses earnestness with good acting. (I might be the only person in this camp, but the smores are to die for.) I know there are plenty of people who think he's the bee's knees when it comes to passionate performances, but I just feel like he's stretching further than he can reach as an actor. He seems sincere here, yes, but not entirely believable in the role. For some reason, I think a more burned-out- looking actor would have been better, even Jeff Bridges – despite the age difference – because he would lend a lot of gravitas to a pretty demanding role.
As always, I was amazed and impressed by the imagination of Christopher Nolan (who also scripted), but I was largely disappointed by the movie, particularly its denouement. There's much to see and soak in, and it's true that overthinking the movie will lead you to really dislike it (or stare at it, mouth agape), but often it's just too much seriousness and not enough awe and wonder.
| 6
|
Not being a fan of any of the Hannibal films or in excessive gore in TV/film I was surprised to find myself becoming intrigued and in the series.
It is not without its flaws, after 5 or 6 episodes it seems the crimes get a bit random and I felt it lost my interest a bit around here, not really doing a good job of linking it to the story on the whole.
Character wise, Will Graham is an excellent character for the most part, a likable main character with great depth in his story and you have empathy for him towards the end of the series. Saying that I found it a tad annoying how much it focuses and i'd say over plays his situation in the last few episodes.
Mad Mikkelsen as Hannibal was great casting although I did find it hard to pick up what he was saying at some points with the thick accent.
Laurence Fishburne is much as you would expect, plays his role well.
Alana Bloom and Will Graham relationship works well due to the chemistry between the pair on screen.
The characters of Jimmy Price and Brian Zeller (two of the forensic scientists) are terrible and annoying, it seems they are meant to portray some kind of comedy role which doesn't fit at all in the series.
Good watch, can't wait for the next series to see how the rest of the characters develop, recommended
| 7
|
It was a worth watch until the last 3 episodes and that silly corny happy family ending didn't help. All the potential was lost for me.
| 5
|
Aside from being way too long, the worst aspect of this is the obvious: these guys are too old. They have no energy. They walk like they need a walker with tennis balls on the tips. It has to be a joke, but no, the Oscars and all the netflix drones love it.
Also, none of the characters, except Hoffa I guess, have any real personality. I'm not sure if that was bad writing or just the unsurprising outcome of using a bunch of actors that are just too old to play anything but a really old, slow, enervated, feeble person.
The whole film really feels enervated and feeble. It is like watching Goodfellas at half speed, with a couple layers of mesh on the screen to blur it all. Ray Liotta dodged a bullet not being cast in this.
I borrowed a dvd to watch it and even that was too much time and money invested in Oldfellas.
| 5
|
No, this is not loki. This is Sylvie show. Bait and switch. I will say most low rating review is true. This atrocious show is nowhere belong 2011 loki.
Youtube Nerdroctic, clipped coin and loki picth meeting say everything. What this show is about.
| 1
|
I am a fan of Bhuvan that's why I am giving 7/10...but seriously didn't like it. It did not match my expectations...I think that kind of standards you have maintained...but still the music was not bad ....and some comedy scenes were good enough.
| 7
|
Even adam sandler made a dramatic film to get taken seriously by The Academy. bad idea, adam. bad idea.
| 4
|
The only reason I'm giving this 4 stars is because I really enjoyed how Micheal Sheen and David Tennant worked together as protagonists.
Other than that, the show really didn't hit the spot. Who would've thought that 6 episodes could feel like 6 seasons?
This show is slabbier than a piece of gum that's been stuck to the bottom of my trainers since 1967.
I want to see those two icons act together again. Maybe in a good show, next time?
| 4
|
In the second installment of the adaption of the Marvel comic book hero's saga. Peter Parker ( Tobey Maguire ) is exhausted and disillusioned at the prospect of continuing his double life as his alter ego Spider Man. Beset with financial troubles and lovesick for his childhood sweetheart Mary Jane Watson, Portrayed modestly by beauty Kirsten Dunst. Fearing he can never be with Mary Jane and protect her from Spider Man's mortal enemies at the same time, He sets out to try and erase Spider Man from his consciousness. But there are plenty of pitfalls along the way. And the more Parker tries to keep things calm, the more catastrophes flare up. Most of them just aching for the return of the wall crawler. And when yet another mad scientist is hideously altered by a benign experiment gone awry, there is never any real doubt that Spidey will return. Otto Octavious or Doc Ock, one of Spider Man's main nemesis in the best selling comic book, is portrayed with maniacal intellect by Alfred Molina. A fine actor who has had excellent rolls in lots of top notch films including 'Boogie Nights' and 'Magnolia' but will probably always be remembered as 'Moody' in the docudrama 'Not without my daughter.' If I did have a problem with this film it would be with Mcquire. If you're going to remain true to the gist of the comic book, which I think this movie otherwise does an excellent job of. You'd have to also remain true to the Peter Parker character. Peter Parker was not a nerd. He was a shy young man who blossomed through the lessons he learned as the incredibly powerful Spider Man. Mcquire looks to me like a real nerd, and therefore he has no room or way to blossom. I think they could have fit someone hunkier with a set of horn rimmed glasses at the beginning and convinced me that they had bulked up through web slinging and grown up through crime fighting while still looking like a movie star. In Mcquire's defense, playing a super hero can be difficult, because it is so outrageous to think that someone could ever posses superpowers, left alone make anyone believe a real human being would choose these reactions to the world in their situation. And he is credible inside this theory. I'm not saying Tobey Mcquire is an incompetent actor, I'm saying he is wrong for this roll. He is simply too milk toast for my tastes. Especially when he's attempting to court the beautiful Dunst. Who's elegance leaves no doubt as to why Spidey would prefer to be human. There are lots of pluses though. Molina is a strong and convincing villain. And the special effects are an absolute wonder. The entire effects crew received an Academy Award for their efforts and it's easy to see why. The deadly artificial limbs sported by Doc Ock, are as convincing as they are terrifying. Whether he's walking down the street, climbing a wall or battling the wall crawler toe to toe, it is a breathtaking spectacle. I have never seen a film, including the amazing 'Star Wars' sequels, which could boast effects as realistic and stunning as these. For fans of this genre there is no drop off from Spider Man to Spider Man II. It is much more like another issue than it is a sequel and this is a credit to the brain trust behind this engine whether or not they meant to present it this way. They tease you with the human struggle, then knock your noggin off with thrilling action. This is a blockbuster worth every penny. Don't miss it. 8 out of a possible 10 T.H.
| 8
|
I couldn't enjoy it because it was all screaming, fighting, cussing, all wrapped up in lies and high stakes betting. I'm a cusser, but even this was Was too much for me. I Think the premise is good just way too chaotic and stressful.
| 2
|
I was a bit skeptical on watching the show because of the low reviews I kept seeing, I decided to check it out myself and am confused as to why people are bashing the show. There are so many easter eggs in just the two episode that I kept rewatching for scenes I missed, the comedy in the show is actually really good and I had quite the laugh watching the show. it obviously look like it's gonna get better as we move on in the show, fake marvel fans complaining like children, you just watch less than 44 minutes of a show and suddenly you call it crap.
| 8
|
Season 2 brought down my fever of season 1, it wz that blunderous...
| 8
|
The fact that this miniseries exists and people believe it to be a perhaps embellished, but ultimately accurate depiction of anything that happened in real life is a testament to everything wrong with TV series and the people who consume them. The series gets so many things so absolutely wrong it's a mystery why the writers chose to use the names of actually existing people and places rather than setting the story in an entirely fictional universe.
Many of these problems have been pointed out in far more detail in think pieces, but just to quickly summarize the most egregious ones:
1) The science depicted is completely wrong, from the magnitude of the disaster to the real effects of radiation on humans. One is only left to wonder how come if the people on the "bridge of death" several kilometers away supposedly died from the effects of radiation, all of the supervisors (who were in the nuclear plant at the time of the accident) survived for decades 2) Many of the events depicted are either complete fabrications, or have been blown out of proportion 3) Of the remaining few that actually did happen, their order is often wrong 4) The Soviet State of the late 80s, while repressive, didn't go around murdering or threatening to murder its own citizens 5) For all the expository scienc-ey talk about rector cores, DNA damage, etc. the real dangers of radiation and nuclear fallout are never properly explained, leaving the viewer wondering what the stakes are and how and why decisions are being taken
The most plausible explanation of why the writers chose to twist the facts to such absurd extremes is that if they had done otherwise there wouldn't be a story worth telling, in which case one is left to wonder why would they choose to adapt it in the first place.
| 4
|
The movie is the same as the animation- the story , the song, the movements. I dont know why do people watch this kind of movie?
| 3
|
I'm writing this review after watching National Anthem and White Christmas. OK, so National Anthem is the first episode and for me it felt like the dirty joke that a stand-up comedian would start his routine with (crude and in your face - just to select the audience and make it more receptive to the following jokes). My opinion at the end of the episode - very well crafted but definitely SOULLESS. I decided to not watch another episode of Black Mirror. So this friend of mine tells me to watch White Christmas because this is the best episode. Broke my promise and watched it. Definitely a step up in ingenuity, however I have the same problem with the LACK OF SOUL of this show. Personally I don't think I'll ever watch another episode of Black Mirror. Bottom line if you want an ingenious type of show that is basically devoid of any type of empathy and all around SOUL - then maybe this is for you - you will probably enjoy the cold and dark ideas of this show. However if you are looking for at least one idea / character that you can be empathic with, then maybe this is not for you.
| 6
|
To be as short as possible. It's pretty decent, with some minor problems.
The good: Henry Cavil it's really trying to be a good Geralt of Rivia, you can see he dig the character and doing his best to bring a faithful version of Geralt on the screen. Ciri and Yennefer are also decent, their acting is on point most of the time and their look it's pretty faithful to the books and games. The story mostly follow some of the most story relevant chapters of the first two books (which are a collection of short novels, with here and there events that will be relevants after, in the saga). The musics are good, and the dialogues and overall feeling is for most parts that of the witcher saga. The fights have good choreography that reminds of the fight in the games. The direction is mostly good, not something out of this world but it's still well built. The special effects are not always perfect, but they hold well enough overall.
The bad: Ok, time to talk about the elephant in the room. Some obvious miscasts: the worse of all is Triss Merigold, for her they chose an actress that really is as far as possible as her description in the books and her image in the game (why always the redheads?). Also, too many black actors; while per se is obviously not a problem, when you cast actor you should always ask yourself for what roles are you casting them. If you are filming, for example, a film about ancient viking, you shouldn't cast half of them as black people. But we live in a time where casts must respect quotas even where it's against the logic of the story. Here it's a bit of a problem because the witcher saga, even if it is set in a fantasy world, its' a world that traspose slavic and north european myths, folklore and populations (in the books the northern kingdoms like Redania and Temeria are slavic, the southern kingodms like Nilfgard are germanic, the supernatural creatures are described as in the slavic folklore with a pinch of tolkien). Since this is supposed to be a medieval northern european kinda of fantasy world, seeing all those ethnicity that aren't supposed to be there break the immersion a bit. It's not so big of a problem that will make you stop watching, but it's something they could and should have avoid, but decided not to to be more inclusive/PC. Let's be happy that the main trio is cast right, i suppose.
So, in the end, should you be watching this series? For now, i would say yes, indeed. Is this a good witcher series? Yes, as i said in the beginning it's a pretty decent transposition. Is this a perfect transposition? No, and sadly because if they wanted to they could come a lot more closer with some simple casting choice.
| 7
|
I resisted this show because I have never been a big fan of Martin Short, until now. Dramedy seems to really fit him. I have found myself laughing out loud many times at him. His delivery is impeccable. And his humour is clever, not his typical slapstick humour. (Though in fairness I haven't seen his full repertoire). Steve Martin is quirky and likeable and Selena Gomez is fascinating to watch. She can act, and her unique voice, understated persona and irresistible outfits are all captivating.
If you're out of things to watch as I was, give it a try. You may be pleasantly surprised too. You may even binge it.
| 8
|
I've always enjoyed musicals I would not classify la-la land as a musical. Yes there's music and dancing but it seems disjointed somehow in this one. I've always enjoyed Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling in a number of their films they were okay in this as far as acting singing was a little disappointing not great singers. So many great modern musicals but sorry to say I cannot classify this one as one of them.
| 3
|
I think the bad reviews are being driven by very passionate fans of the original. I think this is really a good show, it's not amazing, has many plot holes for sure.
The good:
The dysfunctional Robinson Family: I actually liked this take on the family, not the perfect family of old TV, real relationship issues between them, but a sense of companionship amongst them that show that in the end, they stick and work together.
The robot, loved the new take on an alien robot and the connection with Will
The bad:
The ugly:
| 7
|
Ok, the first season was different, interesting and clever. Evidently the writers had no idea about a second season because it is a total disaster at episode 3. Meandering, pointless and no story. Dwelling on the most boring character (the deep), who is pathetic at best. It really is that bad.
| 1
|
This show is pretty good overall. It has some flaws but it's still a great show to watch. The seasons only get better as they go. Very good show to watch and much enjoyable.
| 9
|
This review will sorta just be a barebones review. There's no spoilers because this movie doesn't really have a plot or resolution that can be spoiled. The movie starts out with a reference from 2001: a space odyssey, Which im sure went right over the target audiences heads. Then breaks into a lot of corny jokes in Barbieland. Barbieland is the best part of the movie, the Barbies performances are all hammed up, kind of like a long progressive commercial. But the acting is supposed to be corny and overacted because they're barbies so I'll accept it. Barbieland has a lot of fun moments with the songs and dances and the beach and Cena. The design of Barbieland and costumes of the Barbies and Kens is why this movie is getting this hype ans it definitely lives up to it. Margot Robbie does a good job as barbie and Gosling as Ken is by far the funniest/best part of the movie. Barbie starts her crisis and goes to the real world and everything starts to suck. Ken finding out about patriarchy is the best thing about the real w orld. The jokes in this movie were really weak, the sentimental serious parts are really boring, this movie feels like it's 2 and 1/2 hours and it's only 1h45. Will Ferrell shows up but they forgot to write jokes for him. America Ferrera gives the most genuine performance but her character is devoid of logic and ends up just giving a long lecture. Lots of the corny jokes in this movie fall completely flat, but theres so many jokes in this movie that you will laugh at least a little bit. Men are targeted in this movie and it has no idea what subtlety is, but it is a Barbie movie so i can accept that. And most importantly this movie has no conflict resolution at all, they sorta just end the movie on one last moderately silly joke. This movie was sort of just a forgettable comedy with a lot of hype before it. But hey I'm glad it brought people to theaters again and did have a message worth watching even if it was delivered rather weakly.
6.2/10.
| 6
|
For people who managed to watch the whole movie - congratulations. I gave up after 20-30 mins. For those of you who are planning to watch it - don't waste 3 hours of your life. Believe me, it's not worth it. This is one of the most overrated movies ever. And that's a compliment. I believe people are blinded by the names involved in making it. It's just bad. Nothing really happens in it. It's just borring. A big strike out. And the beginning with the whole painting houses thing...it's said so many times, it's just lame. People that call this a masterpiece are the same type of people that would pay 120.000$ for a banana taped to the wall (look it up). Masterpiece compared to what ? Movie 43 ?
| 3
|
It was very displeasing to me because of a lot of vulgar scenes. I felt all it said was only sex, drug and nihilism.
| 2
|
Dark Knight? Actually not the worst film I have seen but certainly NOT the best either! I have given it 1* to try and shift some balance to proceedings. (it should actually be a 6* or a 7*)
It is NOT better than the Godfather It is NOT better than Shawshank Redemption It is NOT better than Pulp Fiction...and the list goes on!
...this voting system is a sham'. People just seem to watch a film, give it 10 stars stating its "the best film ever made", then go see another film a month later, give it 10 stars.....................and so it goes! Pathetic.
Honestly peeps. There needs to be some order restored! You can enjoy a film and remain middle of the road!
| 6
|
I wanted to like this movie so much but just couldn't. The story had so many things going for it and just crashed. Paul Daño was so good as the brilliant tech scientist and loving husband and father. Michelle Williams was excellent as the mentally disturbed mom who couldn't decide who she was and thus ruined everybody's life. Seth Rogen as the "friend" showed that he can actually act. Sam, the central character was wonderful through all the twists and turns of growing up in a family that was seriously maladjusted internally. The performances were good, but story has a way of sneaking up on you and making you see that it's rotting. It was also too long and you get weary of it long before the end. Watch it sometime when you want to be depressed.
| 5
|
The monkey is likable, the action is especially crazy (leveraging the monkey's acrobatics), and Jason Sudeikis provides some really funny lines throughout! :-) Lots of wild graphic action, irreverent comedy, and a bunch of heart! :-)
| 8
|
Ok. It's early so all of the first reviews coming in will be from a lot of fanboys and will be very inflated. Here's the truth.
Cons: The casting is awful.
The script is forced and rushed.
The acting is subpar.
The character development is mediocre at best, it has a very United Nations vibe, very much trying to cast all races just for the sake of it.
It's gorey for the sake of being gorey. The nude scenes also aren't well done, very rushed.
Pros: Music is well done.
Set locations are again very well done in keeping with the GoT themes, they obviously spent a ton of money here in set production.
I'm hopeful but not optimistic. I'll keep watching for a few more episodes but so far this first episode was horrid except for the final 10 mins, but, it wasn't enough to clear the bad taste out of my mouth. So far this series has a vibe of "throw tons of money at it and everything should be fine". But it's not.
| 5
|
I have no idea how this movie managed to get an 8.6. The story writing is exceptionally bad, and cliches used are dimes a dozen. It seemed a very rushed story involving too many actors and super heros. I do like super hero movies and do enjoy a good fantasy, but this was not it.
| 2
|
As a huge fan of the original Godfather, I have never understood all the hoopla about this film. A great continuation of the story? The only sequel to be better than the original? No way, on both counts - not by a long shot.
First of all, The Godfather is a movie that truly needs no sequel. When that door closes on Kay at the end, that's it - an entire cycle has played out: power has been passed on, the new guard has superseded the old, evil has corrupted goodness and the sins of the father have come back to feast upon the sons. It is a perfect story, complete in itself and suggestive of all that is to come. Anything you could add would only be elaboration, nothing genuinely new. As such, there's nothing - not one single thing - which happens in The Godfather Part II that is not either already implied in the first movie or at least could be predicted by knowing the first movie. Therefore, the story just doesn't feel fresh; it feels more like a "standard" sequel - that is, one done just for the money, to capitalize on the series while it was hot. (The true greatest sequel of all time, of course, is The Empire Strikes Back - superceding the original in so many ways and on so many levels it's unbelievable.)
Now, I'll concede there's an awful lot of artistry on display in this movie - the acting is all great, the cinematography and production design, etc. It certainly doesn't have the *look* of a quickie re-hash. And you can tell that considerable time and effort has gone into the story and in the structuring of the movie. Which makes its failure all the more troubling to watch. First of all, the cross-cutting between the two time periods (Vito Corleone in the early part of the century and Michael in the late '50s) just DOES NOT WORK. I'll challenge anybody on this point; if you think it's a good idea, you're just WRONG! I can half see what Coppola had in mind here, but it's just annoying. First off, the two sequences are not equally weighted - we see far more of the "modern day" Michael segment - and so the Vito scenes come to feel more like an intrusion, a break up of the momentum of the real movie, rather than as a legitimate sequence in its own right. And frankly, it's not a legitimate sequence anyway - it's far too bathed in quaintness and romanticism, it never truly takes Vito to task for the life he has chosen; in fact, it doesn't even give us a good sense of why he has chosen that life. Except for the brief murder scenes, it mostly portrays Vito as a hero - a Robin Hood of the people - and does not give a clear picture of the ruthlessness and cold-bloodedness he would have needed to build up his empire. (For a good portrait of this side of the young Vito, read the chapter in the original Godfather book by Mario Puzo which focuses upon his rise to power. Compare this sequence to the movie's in order to see just how much Coppola has omitted and how much he has romanticized what he's kept.)
Coppola wants to save all his rage and condemnation for Michael, you see - almost as if the Corleone crime family was kind of a Mom and Pop store started by the old man in the good old days, and was great and wonderful until the young whippersnapper came in with all of his newfangled ways and started screwing everything up. If Michael's soul is shown as corroded by the end of the movie, why is Vito not assessed in the same harsh way? After all, if not for him, his son would never have been put in this position in the first place. Curiously, Michael's attempts to "go legitimate" are portrayed as the real horror here, which is certainly an interesting idea, but I think this is a theme much better developed in The Godfather Part III, where the agent of legitimacy becomes the Church (the Vatican), making for a much richer and headier mix. Here, Michael's mainly trying to buy into resorts and casinos in Cuba. How interesting is that?
Finally, this picture moves sooooo slowly and takes so much time to tell its story (er, stories) that it becomes sleep-inducing. Not enough of import happens here for the story to take as long as it does. In short, The Godfather Part II is a film with an inflated sense of its own importance; the wonder is that it has suckered so many millions of people into buying into it. The Godfather is a movie which truly needs no sequel, but if you feel compelled to see one, rent Part III and skip over this tired and pretentious mess.
| 4
|
Quantum theory applied to the past, in the present. Confused ???!!! The binary system of algorithms helps. Or not ???!!! Of the few interesting FX series because the very concept of the series is interesting not to say fascinating. Of such themes that is part of Science Fiction. Until one day it ceases to be. Not that this is the case. At least for many, many generations. Although such a prediction is my curiosity and imagination to speak louder.
| 7
|
The movie had a great plot, with twsits and turns that made you ask, as Birdie Jay exclaims, "WHAT IS REALITY??". Though, I had a head ache at the end (,the good kind if that makes sense). Keep in mind that there is sex scene (no nudity) if you're planning to watch with family. It's a few seconds long but is replayed multiple times.
The bad guys are- of course- bad guys, but there's something about their characters that makes them still likeable. The jokes aren't overdone and they have perfect timing to not affect the overall mood of the movie. Almost everything that happens has some sort of explanation that you were already shown and could think of. But if you can't remember, that's fine, because there's always a flashback to explain every occurance. So, I couldn't really find plot holes.
| 7
|
To be honest, this movie does not deserve all the hate it's getting. It's actually a good set up for future movies but lacked pace and action. Talking about characters, Credence didn't feel like the same Credence from the first installment and I don't know what's with Johnny Depp being this boring. I loved every other character and respective performances especially Jude Law as Dumbledore. Plot is strong and it's reliance on Newt's beasts is something which I want to continue as it's refreshing and different from Harry Potter movies. I trust JK Rowling and have high hopes from whatever's coming next.
| 7
|
I am always a great fan of Chris Hamsworth. His acting was perfect for this film too. But it choose the wrong spot. Bangladesh is never a country like this. It is a highly developing country with great defense system.Our defense system is never like this that was represented in this movie.
| 1
|
I never believe the hype, for that is usually the greatest letdown of a film. I had heard the murmurings before I took my seat in the packed theatre to watch the final chapter of the Dark Knight trilogy, but kept my mind and eyes open until the 2 hour and 45 minute conclusion turned to black again, and the credits let me loose from my silence and my now well warmed cushioned chair.
As a director, Christopher Nolan, has had very few missteps if any before this. His track record includes some of the most interest, dark, original and unpredictable films out there. Even has he was given more money to make films, he never seemed to give up the integrity of giving us a great story, that felt real. Sure, it could be in a world of dreams or in the life of a man who short term memory or duelling magicians, it didn't matter, Nolan had that rare gift of making these other places tangible. On top of that, he made us care, infusing each of his characters with a soul or a believable soullessness.
This is what he did for the super hero genre, he gave it new life, made it feel possible, made it's villains seem like Manson or Bundy and made it's superheroes deep, powerful and yet frail with strife and morals. And while the explosions, the hand to hand comment and the gadgets kept us on the edge the entire time, the pay off in the previous two Dark Knight films, especially the second one, is that this sense of epicness was glued together by small scenes, real interactions, and heart.
Dark Knight Rises feels like a bunch of epic scenes stuck together in a plausible sequence of events. It all makes sense for a super hero movie, but unfortunately this finisher could not just be that. There is no heart, and while there are large, non-computerized crowds rioting in the real streets of New York, they just add to the scale of it all, as does CGI, as opposed to adding to the emotional backbone of this film. Bane is a scary dude. He seemed to have so much potential. The question on everyone's mind about him, would he top the Joker? The answer is no. It isn't Tom Hardy's fault, because the fault lies in his relationship with Batman. I won't give away too much, but there is just not that connection between Batman and Bane or Bane and his objective and while the film is long, there isn't time given to each of the characters to just speak from the heart. And while minor characters like Sir Ian's Alfred may weep, as an audience member, it just didn't seem justifiable or fulfilling as the whole before moment that built up to these supposedly emotional interactions is missing.
Everything else has been commented on. The acting was great. The scenes were epic. But the boat was missed. What happened to the long drawn out scenes with the awesome hand-held camera that felt like a member within the party that the Joker had interrupted? What happened to emotional back and forths that left me teeming with anger or excitement? They seemed to all be replaced with catch phrases, prepped one liners followed by a punch or a head butt. We are no longer invited to the party and must watch from a rather far distance, like Batman, on a screen what will transpire.
Has Nolan fallen off? No. This wasn't a terrible film. It just wasn't "it". It felt too much like a blockbuster, instead of kitchen sink drama. And while the pretty lights of the fireworks fascinate and amuse the masses, I guess I am just interested in the constant, less impressive stars that last for forever and make the sky as a whole a darkness that truly comes together and is filled to the brim with that something.
| 6
|
It's a stunning looking and well shot film with a cast that give outstanding performances. The problem is with the plot (or lack of), the editing and pacing of the movie. It's difficult to argue with the people who say there is no plot. The story never really has a beginning or end and it never really has a point to it all - It's difficult to feel invested in this film. The references made to 60s Hollywood, old films, branded goods and the overall style of the film were great. It's a film that has clearly had a fantastic cast and crew work on it but it has ultimately been let down by the weak script. Tarantino has unfortunately missed the mark with this one.
| 5
|
I have to admit that I couldn't sit through this, I just found it too cheezy, boring, generic and stopped watching roughly half way through the film. I find it quite shocking its the highest grossing film ever. OK so the soundtrack by James Horner is lackluster compared to some of his previous works (Land before Time, Titanic), I did not enjoy this soundtrack at all it was too generic and boring. The story of the film is just... so so so predictable and boring, I mean it's just ripped off Dances with Wolves or Pocahontas or any number of similar stories. It has the generic theme of the evil greedy imperial corporatism vs the nice peaceful at one with nature side who are the underdogs, and the romeo and juliet theme of someone from one side falling for someone from the other. There isn't much more to it than that, other than a lackluster soundtrack, bad acting and overuse of CGI. My girlfriend said she liked the CGI lighting in the film, all the bioluminescent flora and such, I can understand that but personally I'm not a huge fan of CGI as there are actually real things which look so much more impressive. I don't really see the point in watching this film though it kind of feels like it should have been a Disney animation for a younger audience instead, so I can kind of understand if younger people would like it.
| 3
|
A total waste of time. I hate this movie, and I hate Netflix for make me waste 2hrs of my life to see this stuoid movie. No tension, no horror, no good acting. What a mess.
| 1
|
This show has all it needs to make it one of the greatest TV shows of this century. It contains great acting, great characters, great camera and visuals and of course an awesome and exciting story that keeps you wondering what would happen next and how this whole thing will be going to end. Plus all this is wrapped in a dark humorous atmosphere. Definitely a must watch and not just for the average Superhero Fan.
Season 2 unfortunately lost me a bit.
| 8
|
Story telling is an art and Mani Ratnam knows it very well. Standing against the odds and coming up always as a winner is what Guru is all about. Movie depicts the chronological growth of a Guru and how he deals with the roadblocks coming in the way of success. A person who start from zero and becomes the biggest entrepreneur of the country; this is what Guru is all about.
The main character Guru very well played by Abhishek but still on some place I see a copy of Amitabh especially in the courtroom scene which in undoubtedly the best part of the movie. Movie stretches to almost three hours and in the second half bit slow;I found first half amazing. Asihwarya played a brilliant role; I would say her best performance after Hum Dil De Chuke Saman. She looked gorgeous through out the movie; pity that she is so glamorous that even after lot of effort done by the makeup she still didn't look old. Mithun was superb in his role as a Satyawadi reporter so did Madhvan. Vidya Balan in a small role was just good. The supporting cast also justified their role as per the requirement. Cinematography is eye catching and so as the music by A R Rehman. All in all this is a good movie to be watched. Highly recommended.
-Vaibhav
| 8
|
Pretty good series overrall, the core theme was done well and the sets, acting and plot were great for all seasons, i personally thought that some seasons did go on for a little too long though especially the last episode in season 4 but either than that it was a pretty good show.
| 7
|
Why do people love this movie? This movie is not only completely unrealistic, it's also boring. Almost everyone I know who saw this movie and wasn't middle aged said they liked the movie but it was too long and kind of or too boring. Does that make sense? When looking back at this movie, did it really give you anything back? This movie is illogical, stupid, pointless, and umm... like before I get too redundant, annoying. I was hoping that Forrest Gump would die in the war or like get hit by a car when he was running. That would have been hilarious and then this movie could have been up there with Toxic Avenger and Braindead. And the Academy Awards are a joke. They don't recognize really good movies usually, and I'm stil in shock that American Beauty won since it actually deserved an Oscar. I seriously think that Demolition Man or Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles was a better movie. At least Wesley Snipes had a cool hairstyle. Go rent a classic like Vanilla Ice's Cool as Ice or C.H.U.D... Forrest Gump sucks and isn't he more like an anti hero? I'd rather have Leatherface or the Toxic Avenger, but who doesn't root for them anyway?
| 1
|
I loved the game. I love GoT. And there is no comparrison for this with GoT.
Still i'm left with a Feeling that this Witcher series is missing out on the Very good stuff.
It tries, really does. But somehow it needs Something. Male it more believeable please.
I keep watching hoping for the magic to Happens. Waiting for the good Stuff to keep me watching.
| 7
|
Very Childish,no thrill,no curiosity to watch,no originality in the concept,characters very superficial and boring
| 2
|
If you're a big Harry Potter fan it'll be frustrating with all the plot holes. But you have to see the previous movies to know what all is going on. I went with a friend who hadn't seen them all and I ended up needing to explain a lot about the magic and what was happening
| 7
|
I went to an exclusive screening of Venom 2. I didn't expect anything after the news about the age rating, the timing of 90 minutes, and the impression after the first part.
But Andy Serkis tried to make the film very cheerful, cheerful, and looked in one breath. There are no lingering topics with meaningless conversations...
| 10
|
As most have said, in a nutshell, all of the focus on special effects and cinematography left for a neglected storyline. What a shame! Just watched it last night after much anticipation and wondered where the tension had gone that was exhibited in the trailers.
It wasn't gripping, it didn't make me care about the characters, a lot was confusing to the layman who doesn't know anything about space engineering... the list goes on. Best actor was Ed Harris who opened the film as 'Houston'- couldn't see him, but he certainly sounded the most natural, a great contrast to every line by uttered by Clooney (too bad, as I like Bullock and I'm fine with Clooney when he plays Ocean-style characters).
The only success if I were forced to list one (again, apart from the special effects, which like others have mentioned, lost the awe surrounding them anyway after having grown accustomed to the space views deeper into the film) is that I did feel the exposure and the vulnerability of floating in the vast, black emptiness of space, effectively emphasized by the contrast demonstrated upon re-entry into the relatively safe interior of a spacecraft or space station. But they blew it with the lack of character development, not making me feel any anxiety for Bullock or Clooney in this capacity, only for myself were I put into their situation. Again, a shame. Instead of being engrossed in Bullock's storyline or performance, we found ourselves speculating upon why her hair didn't stand up while inside the cabin in the absence of gravity and other trivialities.
Basically they left the plot line in the dust. This would have been better as a documentary about space, rather than incorporating a fictional screenplay. Glad we didn't purchase it on Blu Ray, not worth a re-watch. It's not AWFUL, but it's boring, so earning at most a 3.
| 3
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.