The writing on this show, as on all shows created by Greg Berlanti and Geoff Johns, is just awful. Their storyline continuity couldn't be found by a team of writing experts w/ the most advanced tools known to humankind. They write teleplays that confound, have no bearing on the overarching state of the series, and combine it w/ the need for terrible CGI, intentionally dark lighting to mask those effects, and formulaic tripe they consider quality storytelling. I had hopes for this series, since Akiva Goldsman involved in the creation of it, but even his prodigious talents were weighted down by Berlanti and John's incessant need to be inferior. It's a shame, really, b/c there are actors who participated in this who are quite talented, and given a reasonable storyline, they could've turned this into a decent show.
I've seen better acting in commercials.
This movie was fantastic on so many levels. Prior to watching Glass Onion, I wanted to rewatch this. I really gave it the attention it deserved, and I’m so pleased that I did. The conjunction of the writing, casting, acting, character and story development, and whodunnit nature of the film was truly majestic. There’s so much that could be said about any number of these attributes, but the thing that stood out most to me in the end was the last interaction between Ana de Armas and Daniel Craig, wherein she presumes that she should help the family, regardless of their noteworthy flaws and attempts to undermine her and family. He responds by stating that while he has an opinion, and it’s quite clear that it's an unfavorably one, he presumes that she’ll follow her heart, b/c, as he had noted earlier, she was a good person.
This got me thinking about the fact that among all these people involved in this story, even though one or two of them seemed to be nice people on the surface, when push came to shove, Ms. Armas’ character was the only one who truly had any semblance of decency and kindness. And, this is somewhat a reflection of the world around us, b/c we are often surrounded by those who are only interested in their own personal gain, but if we really pay attention, there will be those who will do what’s right and just, even in the face of adverse personal consequences for themselves and those they love. I believe that it’s really important that we remember this, b/c far too often, we’re provided opportunities to do the right thing, and we ultimately fail others and ourselves. There’s definitely something to be said for those willing and able to show compassion for others, even when it means that we may fail to gain from a situation.
This was a really wonderful character portrait of a young woman seeking her own contentment, while keeping an eye out for those in need of comfort from the travails of their own lives. Both Margaret Qualley and Sigourney Weaver were exceptional in this, and I would recommend this film simply for their efforts alone. Ms. Qualley has truly come into her own as one of the finest young actors working today, while Ms. Weaver gets better w/ age, and her work is capable of rivaling that of any actor in the field.
This is a true cinematic accomplishment. Going in, I didn't realize that the Coen Brothers were responsible for having written and directed this version of True Grit, and I was mightily impressed by their vision, yet adherence to the original story. The acting in this film is incredible. Ms. Steinfeld's portrayal of Mattie Ross will go down as one of the finest performances of all-time, and it cemented her position as one of, if not the, best young actors ever. She gave a remarkable performance that is not to be missed, and her relationship w/ Mr. Bridges' character, Rooster Cogburn, is the highlight of this film. It's a shame that Ms. Steinfeld wasn't nominated for an Academy Award for Best Actress, only for Best Supporting Actress. She most assuredly deserved the former nomination. I will say that I'm not a fan of the Western genre, but regardless, this film is so enthralling and mesmerizing b/c of the cast, true-to-life accuracy of the dialogue, and development of the character's arcs, it should appeal to anyone who is a fan of great cinema.
A couple episodes really saved this mini-series for me. Throughout most of this, I kept asking myself what I was watching, but in the end, there was enough semblance of a storyline that I was able to see the true purpose of this series.
This was a fine piece of storytelling. Were there liberties taken in Albert Ruddy's original material? Most likely. But, that doesn't make this mini-series any less entertaining. The story, coupled w/ some really amazing performances, made this quite an enjoyable watch. Juno Temple and Matthew Goode particularly stood out as having given tremendous renditions of their characters. Upon a rewatching, Ms. Temple was simply phenomenal. She is a terribly underrated actor. Burn Gorman, Dan Fogler, Nora Arnezeder, Miles Teller, Colin Hanks, Josh Zuckerman, Anthony Ippolito, Justin Chambers, and Giovanni Ribisi were all great, as well. If my rating were based solely on acting, I would've awarded this a 10/10.
I enjoy these period pieces that take a deep-dive into the era from which the story derived. It adds a lot of authenticity to the creation, and this was no different. If you're a fan of The Godfather, you'll likely love this. If you enjoy stories w/ lush arrangements of well-defined characters and multiple moving pieces that make it seem as if the well-known finished product would never come together, this may be the story for you.
Having seen this once before, I was recently having a discussion w/ someone about this documentary, which prompted me to view it again. As many others have complained about, this documentary was way, way too long. This could've been wrapped up in a 90-minute documentary w/out any loose ends or missing components. Instead, the filmmakers decided to tell everyone's sob stories about this fiasco, but the problem was, the sob stories were coming from those who perpetrated the crime. Therefore, my interest immediately waned in their stories.
Also, the filmmakers' choices for interviewees was really suspect. Doug Matthews, the FBI agent that started this investigation, was just a clown. It's actually embarrassing that someone like that was able to become employed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. He has zero critical thinking skills. As for the other interviewees, there were two who I considered to have any credibility at all. Other than that, it was a lot of self-serving crap that had no place in a documentary that should've been designed to simply tell the story of what had happened, not make victims out of criminals.
If you're intent on watching this, I would suggest skipping the first five episodes of this documentary, and only watch the last episode. The entire summation of what happened w/ this story is covered in a clip from a news segment that encompasses less than 60 seconds. This should give you an idea of the fluff involved over the course of six episodes.
I heard a recommendation for this that made me want to sit down and watch it. When the film began, the first thing I noticed was the age differential between Jaden Smith and Cara Delevingne. As I kept watching, I noted how this film was derivative of others of its genre, such as "Me and Earl and the Dying Girl" and "The Fault in Our Stars," specifically. Yet, I didn't feel that this film captured the quality of either of those. This being said, as the story progressed, it definitely grew on me and immersed me in the lives of two young people living w/ heartbreaking tragedy.
Watching any child die is tremendously difficult, and this film is no different. The scriptwriters knew this and played at it, which gave this film a more convincing veneer. It wasn't an easy film to watch b/c of the narrative, but at a certain point, I became invested in it to the point that these other concerns melted away, and I was just left w/ two teenagers dealing w/ something that no teenager should have to.
One of the things that makes this film work is the work by a strong cast of actors. Jaden Smith, Cara Delevingne, Nia Long, Cuba Gooding, Jr., and RZA were all exceptional in their roles. While stronger writing could have made for a better overall movie, these actors really stepped up and nailed their roles.
This was a terrific film. The acting was top-notch, the story was intriguing and well-paced, and just when you thought that you had everything figured out, the storyline swerved to create something that was likely not what you were imagining. This movie was really a drama piece built Mark Rylance's character. He was so tremendous in this, immersing himself in the role, that I almost forgot that I was watching him portray a character.
I think that this received a lot of unfairly placed hatred from those who simply don't like Disney, b/c people like Ron DeSantis tell them not to like Disney. As someone who isn't overly invested in the whole Star Wars universe, I will say that this was an interesting watch, and I enjoyed the storyline. I liked how they connected Obi-Wan to Leia and Luke, as it fills in some of the backstory that was missing from later films in the series.
I think the thing that stood out most for me, though, was the acting. Both Moses Ingram and Vivien Lyra Blair were fantastic in their roles. Ms. Igram really captured her role quite well, as it called for a wide-range of emotions, and she played it remarkably well. She's been impressive in other roles, and I think that she's only going to become a much bigger star on the big screen. As for Ms. Blair, she was tremendous, especially for such a young actor. She played her role as someone w/ much more worldly knowledge than her age would indicate. She really nailed it, and I think that she has a bright future, as well.
There were portions of this film that I truly enjoyed and portions that I could've done w/ out. Since there was much more good than bad, I'll start w/ what I liked:
As for what I didn't care for:
I'm ambivalent about this. I am not at all a fan these American defenders of the faith films. I didn't realize that this was a film about a private contractor who'd just gotten out of the service. If I had, I wouldn't have watched it. My feeling is that these films consistently misrepresent these characters in order to make them palatable for the general public.
The cast was strong, but the script was incredibly lacking. There were a number of things that were just off about this; things that weren't necessarily that simple to put a finger on but nonetheless, still missing the mark. I felt that the plot was weak and contrived, and if anyone bothered to apply any critical thinking skills whatsoever, it was likely implausible. We're supposed to believe that a hardcore serviceman kills a scientist who was working on an antiviral vaccine that had the potential to save millions, and he's upset by this? It seems much more likely that he'd be in the anti-vaxx camp and would believe that he'd done the world a service. Regardless, this plot point hardly made much of a difference in the film, so it seemed a rather odd choice to include this particular dilemma.
The ending of the film also bore little relation to what seemed to be the purpose of Chris Pine's character's pursuit throughout the film. In fact, I felt that there were a number of areas throughout the film that were rather inexplicable. The only reason that I gave this film a 6/10 rating was b/c of the casting. If this were some random cast, this probably would've rated a 4/10.
I didn't have huge hopes for this, but I certainly thought that it would be better than what was produced. This film was overly done CGI-wise, generic, derivative ("The Goonies" anyone?), and rather uninteresting b/c of the poor pacing of the film. I thought that Sophia Ali and Tom Holland were paired well together, but the script just didn't suit them. Given how the games were designed, they could've done so much more the history and mythology of the storyline that could've made the clue-finding more intriguing, but they failed in this aspect, too. I'd probably watch a sequel, but I wouldn't be very excited about it.
Watching this reminded me of watching an overhyped boxing match. It's supposed to be two world-class fighters, and in the first half of the fight, a few solid shots are landed, but it's mostly a feeling out process. In the latter half of the fight, just when you think things are about to get interesting, both fighters show signs of tiring which become more significant, as the fight carries on into the last few rounds. By the time the last round comes to pass, you're basically over the fight, thinking that even one, big, knockout blow couldn't salvage this mess of a fight, and when the knockout doesn't come, the fight goes to the judges' scorecards. In a split-decision, one fight is awarded the victory, although, in reality, they both fought not to lose rather than to win, and you're left w/ that empty feeling wondering why you just wasted $50 on a pay-per-view boxing match that once again didn't live up to its billing.
This story started off well, then just imploded down the stretch. This was a made-for-TV movie back in the '80s, I believe it was, w/ essentially the same storyline. If not for the cast in this film, I would've probably rated it a four on story alone.
I have to say that I was really surprised by this film. It wasn't that the story was overly original, although it was engaging and interesting, but the acting really pulled this together quite nicely. Eric Bana did a terrific job in the lead role, as did BeBe Bettencourt in her role as Ellie Deacon. There were a number of standout performances, but I felt that these two were notable, and they made this film a worthwhile investment of time.
This was a sweet movie. The cast had great chemistry together, and the ending was definitely not the cliché that you normally see in this genre of film which made for a refreshing change of pace.
This only gets a six out of 10 based on the acting. The story, while going along quite well for much of the film, came to a crashing halt w/ the realization of what had really occurred. It was really amateurish writing. I don't know if this was a departure from the novel, which I haven't read, but it seemed a rather integral portion of the story, so I'm guessing that it was taken from the book. Given that the ending didn't even make sense, I'm guessing that it was taken from the book, so in totality, it just wasn't a well-written story. It was, more or less, half of a good idea for a story.
Additionally, while I mentioned that the acting bumped this up a notch, one poor casting choice was that of the son, Ethan. If the script calls for a 15-year-old child, cast a 15-year-old child (or someone reasonably w/in that range). Do not cast 20-22-year-olds to play these roles, particularly when they look like they can pass for 28 in the most important scenes of the film. I thought that casting had gotten away from this need to cast older actors in younger roles, but I suppose not.
This was definitely better than the seven I rated it, but it wasn't quite an eight. I would say that it ranked right around a 7.6/7.7 or so. This movie was really enjoyable. It was amusing, interesting, original, didn't take itself too seriously, and it was actually touching to see the mother-daughter relationship and how it developed between Taissa Farmiga and Malin Akerman's characters.
I also have to say, I've never been a big Malin Akerman fan. I just felt that in her earlier work, she wasn't a particularly strong actor. However, over the years, she's seemed to settle into the roles she's played much better. And, in this movie, I think that it may be the best performance I've ever seen her give. She was really impressive.
The movie itself was pretty good, but Ms. Turner-Smith was outstanding. She is an incredibly fine actor, and I can't wait to see her in more roles. She's has a tremendous on-screen presence that really conveys intent, meaning, and feeling. It was really impressive to watch.
As the top commenters have already stated, this was a really interesting film. Both Anne Hathaway and Jason Sudeikis stepped outside the type of role you'd come to find them in, and they both performed quite nicely in this. This film does get rather dark, but it keeps you drawn in by the originality of the script. Overall, I felt that this film was really well done.
I had heard tremendous things about this film, and I have to say, while it's certainly possible that my expectations were set too high, I was disappointed in the end-product. Of course, Kipling's story is a classic, and the CGI was gorgeous, but the problem I had was w/ the development of the Mowgli character. Through the first hour of the film, I found him rather off-putting. He was incredibly selfish and obstinate and dismissive of those around him. I really didn't like him at all. I also found it odd that the opening scene showed how athletic he was supposed to have been, considering he was raised by wolves, but in the scene, where he's attempting to get the fruit out of the tree, he literally can't jump more than six inches off the ground? For whatever reason, this really strained my suspension of disbelief, and I found myself not particularly enjoying the film. Ultimately, the rating I gave the film was based on the remarkable cast, the CGI, and Kipling's story, even if they strayed from its roots.
I watched this, b/c generally speaking, many family-friendly movies have some value to them making them worth watching. In the case of this film, there really wasn't anything to grasp onto. First off, it seems that the script was designed w/ particularly young children in mind. There was no humor, and the monsters were something you'd see on Fraggle Rock or Sesame Street. The acting was all right, and the lead, Tamara Smart has some chops, but overall, it's really not worth a watch, unless you have children under the age of 10.
This is typical WWE trash. It's "humor" made for first- and second-graders and those people bigger in stature who vote Republican. It's inane, disgusting, misogynistic, homophobic, and oh, what a surprise, everyone's white! Hmm...didn't see that coming from a bunch of racist trash like the McMahon family. Glad that they could at least drag themselves away from a Trump neo-Nazi rally to make this garbage. The entire premise of the movie is a bully and his friends getting back at a guy they'd bullied for years all for what they believed was standing up for himself. What self-respecting actor would participate in a film made by them?
This was Mission: Impossible meets a financial seminar.
This was a truly superior film b/c of the story, the struggle, and the achievement. The acting was also exceptional. I really enjoy films based on true stories, and this film was no exception. The obstacles that Ms. Mutesi and her family had to overcome in her efforts to become a master chess champion were notably difficult. For as much as those of us in third-world countries take for granted, there are so many families in other parts of the world that struggle mightily on a daily basis w/out even the basics to survive. To be able to manage that, while overcoming a clear lack of educational and financial resources, is remarkable, and it makes Ms. Mutesi's achievement all that much more impressive.
I was also incredibly impressed by the paths of all the children in the film. Due to the influence of Mr. and Mrs. Katende, as well as the game of chess, they learned that they could have more than what they were born into. They are now in the midst of achieving dreams heretofore unimaginable to them or their families. It really speaks to the power of education, mentorships, and community involvement in a child's life, b/c these same individuals will then be able to provide for their communities the same way their communities once provided for them.
At first, I have to say that I was reluctant to watch this. I'm not a fan of horror movies or zombies. I just don't find either topic very interesting. However, given that this seemed more in the vein of a Zombieland than a true horror film, I decided to give it a chance, and I'm so glad that I did. This film was really, really cute! The story itself was pretty original, the characters were interesting, for a movie w/ a bunch of children who played a major role, they really did a great job, and the three leads were fantastic, especially Ms. Nyong'o. She was just incredible in this role! This movie was funny, sweet, endearing, dramatic, and just a lot of fun.
I remember first watching this movie 35 years in 1985. Back then, it was called Rocky IV. It wasn't all that great then, and it hasn't aged very well since. I don't understand why they didn't just call this a remake, or come up w/ an entirely new script.
There was something about this movie that was quite compelling. I felt that there was a sub-divider in the acting, however. There were those who did a perfectly fine job and those who were, more or less, made-for-television actors. Yet, the lead actors were all quite good. I really liked the storyline a lot, as it kept me interested and guessing until near the end, and the ending of the film didn't disappoint. Normally, I would rate a movie of this caliber a seven, but in this case, b/c of the intriguing storyline, intricacies of the side story between Johnathon Schaech and his dying wife, and the non-generic culmination, I gave it an extra point and bumped it up to an eight. I feel that this is definitely a film worthy of a watch.
If I wanted to see something from a first-person perspective, I'd do it myself. The shaky camera bit is awful. It's best left to home movies filmed by children who've received their first camera as a gift. Regardless, you may be asking yourself, what's this movie about? It's a reasonable question to ask, when watching a film. In fact, it's the same question I had...35 minutes into the film...the point that I finally had enough and turned it off.
