Trakt for iOS
Works on iPhone and iPad.
Realy boring, one of the worst movies of this year
loading replies
@ehsan57 You must either be a nazi or absent of any human emotion to say something absurd as you did about this FANTASTIC movie.
I guess my rating is in line with others, but what's up with these guys linking 13 and 25 minute YouTube videos to 'explain' the movie? It's not that complicated if you've seen a few of these. It's one guy and he's had a mental breakdown. I won't say more. Just watch it again with that in mind and most of it will fall into place. That said, I don't think any answer claiming to be either correct or accurate is right. It's a story and I believe a few things were left open for you to interpret it in your own way. This is the kind of movie that doesn't do your thinking for you. Your mind has to fill in the blanks, giving you a more... personal experience.
That being said, the spider thing didn't bother me like I thought it would. I am arachnophobic, but they were simply out of place. I don't think we needed the sex club, either. And the yellow theme all the time. I hated the blue in the Underworld movies; the yellow doesn't do Enemy any favours, either.
loading replies
Actually there is nothing left open to interpretation. Everything in the movie had specific meaning. The movie seems straight forward, but most people will take things too literally and miss out on the subtle elements. That is why I HIGHLY recommend you watch the '25 minute' youtube video to shine some light on what you think you know. Trust me, you won't be disappointed.
this movie is very good, but what frustrates me is that he is not easy to understand. seriously, I needed to see a video reviews of this film. This movie is about a guy who has two sides of himself, Adam does not know who he really is. Adam works as a teacher in a college, who have a boring life. he does not usually see the movie, until that decite rent one and find you can live a happy life with his wife. PS: the spider represents the disturbed relationship with his wife, for this reason he fucks other women to forget the problems and feel good
loading replies
Unfortunately your interpretation of the movie is incorrect. This might help: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9AWkqRwd1I
Seen in a movie theater.
Solid implementation of hero's journey with a reasonable plot device, you basically get a medical drama in a space industry setting. But besides main character everything else could have been done significantly better. Cinematography is good, but nothing novel. There were basically no reasons to shoot any part of this movie in space (besides bragging rights I guess).
It is almost three hours, but somehow all characters (including the main, but less so) fell underdeveloped and kinda cliché, not much depth to them. There is also no subtlety. Russian-style feminism is a bit forced, but sort of more realistic?
There are couple of 'awww' and a little bit more 'bruh' moments. It wants to be drama with elements of comedy, but could not truly turn serious.
This movie was done partly for propaganda, but what is its message? Russian female doctors can do everything, including space?
Despite all of the above, it was quite enjoyable and easy to watch. I did not notice those three hour passing by.
Overall: 6/10. Nothing novel, watch Gravity instead.loading replies
@tomossible Gravity is in a league of its own. This movie was not even close.
Calling it now: bet it's cannibalism
loading replies
@tomekad That would have made this movie actually interesting.
Review by Pradipa PR
A potentially great film being held hostage by its PG-13 rating and its messy, all over the places screenwriting.
By PG-13 I don't simply mean its visuals/goriness, but most importantly its dialogues, themes, and storytelling it tries to raise. Let me explain.
First, the dialogues.
The film opens with murder and Batman narrating the city's anxious mood. We get a glimpse of noir in this scene, but it soon falls flat due to a very uninteresting, plain, forgettable choice of words Batman used in his narration. Mind you, this is not a jab at Pattinson - Pattinson delivered it nicely. But there is no emotion in his line of words - there is no adjectives, there is no strong feelings about how he regards the city full of its criminals.
Here's a line from the opening scene. "Two years of night has turned me to a nocturnal animal. I must choose my targets carefully. It's a big city. I can't be everywhere. But they don't know where I am. When that light hits the sky, it's not just a call. It's a warning to them. Fear... is a tool. They think I am hiding in the shadows. Watching. Waiting to strike. I am the shadows." Okay? Cool. But sounds like something from a cartoon. What does that tell us about you, Batman?
Compare this to a similar scene uttered by Rorschach in Watchmen. "The streets are extended gutters and the gutters are full of blood. And when the drains finally scab over, all the vermin will drown. All those liberals and intellectuals, smooth talkers... Beneath me, this awful city, it screams like an abattoir full of retarded children, and the night reeks of fornication and bad consciences." You can say that Rorschach is extremely edgy (he is), but from that line alone we can tell his hatred towards the city, and even more so: his perspective, his philosophy that guides him to conduct his life and do what he does.
Rorschach's choice of words is sometimes verbose, but he is always expletive and at times graphic, making it clear to the audience what kind of person he is. Batman in this film does not. His words are always very safe, very carefully chosen, which strikes as an odd contrast to Pattinson's tortured portrayal of Batman as someone with a seemingly pent up anger. His choice of words is very PG-13 so that the kids can understand what Batman is trying to convey.
And this is not only in the opening scene. Throughout the film, the dialogues are written very plainly forgettable. It almost feels like the characters are having those conversations just to move the plot forward. Like that one encounter between Batman and Catwoman/Selina when she broke into the house to steal the passport or when Selina asked to finish off the "rat". They flow very oddly unnatural, as if those conversations are written to make them "trailer-able" (and the scenes indeed do appear on the trailer).
Almost in all crucial plot points the writers feel the need to have the characters to describe what has happened, or to explictly say what they are feeling - like almost every Gordon's scene in crime scene, or Selina's scene when she's speaking to Batman. It feels like the writers feel that the actors' expression just can't cut it and the audience has to be spoonfed with dialogues; almost like they're writing for kids.
Second, the storytelling.
Despite being a film about vengeance-fueled Batman (I actually like that cool "I'm vengeance" line) we don't get to see him actually being in full "vengeance" mode. Still in the opening we see Batman punching some thugs around. That looks a little bit painful but then the thugs seem to be fit enough to run away and Batman let them be. Then in the middle of the film we see Batman does something similar to mafias. Same, he just knocked them down but there's nothing really overboard with that. Then eventually in the car chase scene with the Penguin, Batman seem to be on "full rage mode", but over... what? He was just talking to Penguin a moment ago. The car chase scene itself is a bit pointless if not only to show off the Batmobile. And Batman did nothing to the Penguin after, just a normal questioning, not even harsher than Bale's Batman did to Heath's Joker in The Dark Knight - not in "'batshit insane' cop" mode as Penguin put it.
Batman's actions look very much apprehensive and controlled. Nothing too outrageous. Again, at odds with Pattinson's portrayal that seem to be full of anger; he's supposed to be really angry but somehow he still does not let his anger take the best of him. The only one time he went a bit overboard that shocked other characters is when he kept punching a villain near the end of the film. But even then it's not because his anger; it's because he injected some kind of drug (I guess some adrenaline shot). A very safe way to drop a parent-friendly message that "drug is bad, it can change you" in a PG-13 film.
And all that supposed anger... we don't get to see why he is angry and where his anger is directed at. Compare this to Arthur Fleck in Joker where it is clear as sky why Arthur would behave the way the does in the film. I mean we know his parents' death troubled him, but it's barely even discussed, not even in brief moments with Alfred (except in one that supposedly "shocking" moment). So... where's your vengeance, Mr. Vengeance? And what the hell are you vengeancing on?
Speaking of "shocking" moment... this is about the supposed Wayne family's involvement in the city's criminal affairs that has been teased early in the film. Its revelation was very anticlimactic: the supposed motive and the way it ended up the way it is, all very childish. If the film wanted the Wayne to be a "bad person", there's a lot of bads that a billionaire can do: tax evasion, blood diamond, funding illegal arms trade, fending off unions, hell, they can even do it the way the Waynes in Joker did it: hints of sexual abuses. But no, it has to be some bloody murder again, and all for a very trivial reason of "publicity". As if the film has to make it clear to the kids: "hey this guy's bad because he killed someone!" Which COULD work if the film puts makes taking someone's life has a very serious consequence. But it just pales to the serial killing The Riddler has done.
Even more anticlimactic considering how Bruce Wayne attempted to find a resolve in this matter only takes less than a 5 minute scene! It all involves only a bit of dialogues which boils down to how Thomas Wayne has a good reason to do so. Bruce somehow is convinced with that and has a change of heart instantly, making him looks very gullible.
And of course the ending is very weak and disappointing. First, Riddler's final show directly contradicts his initial goal to expose and destroy the corrupt elites. What he did instead is making the lives of the poor more difficult, very oxymoron for someone supposed to be as smart as him.
Second, the way Batman just ended up being "vengeance brings nothing and I should save people more than hurting people" does not get enough development to have him to say that in the end. Again - where's your vengeance? And how did you come to such character development if nothing is being developed on? And let's not get to how it's a very safe take against crime and corruption that closely resembles Disney's moralistic pandering in Marvel Cinematic Universe film.
Last, the visuals.
I'm not strictly speaking about gore, though that also factors in the discussion. The film sets this up as a film about hunting down a serial killer. But the film barely shows how cruel The Riddler can be to his victims. Again, back to the opening scene: we get it, Riddler killed the guy, but it does not look painful at all as it looks Riddler just knocked him twice. The sound design is very lacking that it does not seem what The Riddler done was conducted very painfully. Riddler then threw away his murder weapon, but we barely see blood. Yet when Gordon arrived to the crime scene, he described the victim as being struck multiple times with blood all over. What?
Similarly, when Riddler forced another victim to wear a bomb in his neck. The situation got pretty tense, but when the bomb eventually blow off, we just got some very small explosion like a small barrel just exploded, not a human being! I mean I'm not saying we need a gory explosion with head chopped off like in The Boys, but it does not look like what would happen if someone's head got blown off. Similarly when another character got almost blown off by a bomb - there's no burnt scar at all.
Why the hell are they setting up those possibly gory deaths and scars if they're not going to show how severe and painful these are? At least not the result - we don't need to see blood splattered everywhere - just how painful the process is. Sound design and acting of the actors (incl. twitching, for example) would've helped a lot even we don't see the gore, like what James Franco did in The 127 Hours or Hugh Jackman in Logan. In this film there's almost no tense at all resulting from those.
I'm not saying this film is terrible.
The acting, given the limited script they had, is excellent. Pattinson did his best, so did Paul Dano (always likes him as a villain), Zoe Kravitz, and the rest. Cinematography is fantastic; the lighting, angle, everything here is very great that makes a couple of very good trailers - perhaps one could even say that the whole film trades off coherency for making the scenes "trailer-able". The music is iconic, although with an almost decent music directing. And I guess this detective Batman is a fresh breath of air.
But all that does not make the movie good as in the end it's still all over the places and very PG-13.
Especially not with the 3 hours runtime where many scenes feel like a The Walking Dead filler episode.
If you're expecting a Batman film with similar gritty, tone to The Dark Knight trilogy or Joker, this film is not for you. But if you only want a live-action cartoon like pre-Nolan Batmans or The Long Halloween detective-style film, well, I guess you can be satisfied with this one.
loading replies
@xaliber You nailed it. This is exactly what my thoughts were and you captured them wonderfully!
amazing. beautiful. the best thing i have ever seen. iconic.
loading replies
@alanablooms What sort of drugs were you on to think so highly of this movie?
The forgettable younger sister of Black Swan. A bland Dakota Johnson, Tilda Swinton playing type, and one good performance by Mia Goth. The score and the choreography are more than solid, the cinematography is alright. The rest of the film is not even worth talking about: trash.
loading replies
@coffee_in_an_iv My thoughts exactly! It could have been so much better.
what can i say? had high expectations but this movie from jordan was boring AF. it wasnt scary, it wasnt that funny. Predictable and just not very fun to watch. the acting was good but the writing was pretty simple. The best thing about this movie was the creepy mix of i got 5 on it. In this case the trailer was better than the movie itself. And everybody looking for a deep meaning is just kidding themselves
loading replies
@idokxob HA. I read your review after writing mine. I think we almost said the same thing. This movie was a joke.
Shout by IHateBadMovies.com
VIP8How does a movie like this even get made? He thought of such a bonkers movie? The first thing that you need to know is that this movie is incredibly original. Sure, we've seen some of the action scenes in this movie done in many other movies. What sets this movie apart is that it never loses track of the central story. Despite the frantic pace I felt that I knew the characters and the bigger story. I am not going to lie - I started to drift a bit in the middle but I think that was more on me (it was late). Roger Ebert once said that all movies should be seen on a big screen - I think this movie is a perfect example of this theory. I loved it.
follow me at https://IHATEBadMovies.com or facebook IHATEBadMovies
loading replies
@adammorgan And here I thought we shared similar tastes in movies. Actually watched this based on your rating from your website. This was probably in the top 5 worst movies I've ever seen, and I've seen a lot of them.
Believe all the hype! This is not only the best horror movie of the year, but also of the last years!! It's a masterpiece, and I'm so happy that we have something so unique now in the horror genre, in the time of so many reboots and remakes. This one is special. This movie is sophisticated, it's original, it has some of the best acting I've seen and Toni Collette will be for sure nominated at the Oscar for this iconic performance. Also, the directing.. Wow. Absolutely genious! All the takes and close ups.. Perfection. The soundtrack is also amazing. Everything works and we have here a modern masterpiece that will be talked for years and years!!!
loading replies
@thici86 What drugs were you on when you watched this pile of crap?
Where is this episode!? Was it an April fools joke? I never saw it and can’t find it anywhere to watch!?
loading replies
@gex2501 kimcartoon.to/Cartoon/Genndy-Tartakovsky-s-Primal/Episode-6?s=beta&pfail=1&fbclid=IwAR1_lMtXE2yRZx4q2WzMoGC97sLhb1Q_tq1xLgtlvGnrAApmpG0lBNkrLKg
This show is not bad. It has some twists here and there, but seems like the 'good guys' have it way too easy. If you like this show, make sure to check out Perfume (2018). FANTASTIC show.
loading replies
@andreas1138 There's some closing, although it's somewhat predictable. They leave a little at the end for continuation, but not really sure what can be done at this point. I think the original idea was interesting, but there were more questions than answers.
