This was pretty bland. With a movie that features Macao and Hong Kong as settings to only use 'B' roll footage of the two seems like a poor decision. But I guess it was about the money. It always is. The leads were good. Love Mitchum. Jane Russell is wow. The story was just not that interesting.
The John Wick of vampire movies. The ridiculousness of the fight scenes plays well here. Hilarious. Once Nic Cage started realizing he was a buffoon and just started playing himself in movies his career has really been resurrected.
There was just something different between John Kelly in the movie and in the novel. Hmm. I just can’t put my finger on it.
How much material from the book was in the movie? Besides sharing a title I’d say about 1%. At least Tom Clancy is not alive to see his great book turn into a clone of about 142 other movies.
This movie was 50 Shades of Craptastic. At no point did anything make sense. Except I was happy when Grey died.
Some good some bad here. Improvements over the prior movies is that Harrison Ford is no longer Jack Ryan. He was at LEAST 15 years too old to be playing the part. Affleck was an improvement. Live Schreiber was so much better as John Clark than Willem DeFoe. 1000X. If you read the books you already know that.
Some of the changes they make from the book do not make sense. Leaving out entire plot lines. I think Clancy just sold them a list of character names and said a nuke weapon got lost a long time ago and now it came home to blow up a football game.
So many changes from the book. Some unnecessary. I think the contract between Tom Clancy and the movie studio was something like, "Sell us the names of the characters in your book and we will use 28% of your story to make a movie". If there is one person in the world who has read a Tom Clancy novel and then thought, "Who should they cast as John Clark?" - a larger powerful ex-Navy SEAL and then came up with Willem Dafoe- well they're on drugs. No pun intended with this movie.
Reese won an Academy Award for Best Actress. What happened? This was awful. She was only about two steps above awful.
If I ever traveled to Avatar world, I would invent arrow proof cockpit glass for the helicopters and become rich.
People sure did faint a lot at the turn of the 18th century.
Not quite what I was expecting. The backdrop of World War I to do some The Matrix/Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon stunts was some serious juxtaposition. There was history but this was a lot of fluffed up action, which wasn't always done really well. Some of the scenes involving the goat laden mountain top area just didn't work, specifically the parachute jump. Absolutely ridiculous. The special effects used a little bit after that where characters were being suspended off the side of the mountain looked terrible on the big screen of the movie theatre. We are talking Darth Maul falling to his cut in half death in The Phantom Menace.
Last big problem was making Woodrow Wilson into a Great War era Bill Clinton getting caught in sexual misadventures in the White House. COME ON!
The easter egg in the closing credits with a smirking Adolph Hitler makes you think there is more of these to come. I hope they improve on them a little bit.
Sadly this is still among the best of the DC Universe films and it was just not good. Everything that felt right with the first one seemed to be missing here. They made Diana look like a brat in the opening Olympiad sequence. I get that she had to be taught the moral about lying to use later in the film but her behavior looked like it belonged in an Adam Sandler movie.
The plot device they used to get Steve into this movie was borderline shameful. The TV series handled it better. That is saying something. Everyone has beat up on the production and CGI enough so I don't feel the need to add anything on that. It felt so much longer than its 2.5 hour run time. Bad editing.
Liam Neeson is 68 years old. And just got out of the military 9 years ago in this movie? And fell out of a second story. And I have already seen this movie. If it were titled Reverse Taken.
Fantastic cinematography. The continuous take with the camera moves was well done. But the climax left a lot to be desired. Just thought there would be a better finish.
I have to say it was better than I was expecting. But I wasn’t expecting much.
It was eerie how much they made Scarlett look like the girl in the real painting.
After 8 years in the US Navy on submarines I knew I was going to have problems with the movie on a technical level. The sixty degree down angle ordered is ridiculously ridiculous. Remember when they ordered a 30 degree down when they were diving the first time and everyone stood at an angle without falling over? Why weren’t things crazy at 60 down bubble?
Anyway my major need is this: Why is an English actor(Oldman) playing the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and a Scotsman(Butler) playing a CO of a submarine? Were all the American actors busy?
All complaining aside this was still really entertaining.
A renewed interest in the English monarch has been triggered by The Crown on Netflix. I'm just not sure this movie was worth my time. It takes a lot of liberties with actual history. It definitely makes the religious war of post Henry VIII rule look like only the Catholics were crazy. The best part of the movie is future James Bond Daniel Craig playing an assassin priest. Quite the foreshadowing.
I saw this movie. It was called The Avengers. It had an all powerful cube. And alien invaders. From the past. OMG. I used to love DC when I was a kid. What happened? At least they could have changed the shape of the sinister device. Another cube?
I think the typecasting of the "rebel" FBI Agent has pretty much been done to death. Bruce must think he has a corner on the market. The story in Mercury Rising had potential but I just don't think the director got out of it what he could have. I think the kid playing Simon was probably the best part of the movie. I thought he did a really nice job of making you believe. The cheesy sound effect when he would "read" the code really had to go though. If Simon had such a fear of strangers, why was he OK to be handed off to Stacey and even spend the night at her apartment. She wasn't even ticked at Bruce when he left Simon with her in the coffee house and actually apologized to him. Alec Baldwin--such a long way from the Jack Ryan days. His career has plummeted so far that these are the types of roles he gets now, the lame bad guy (see Cat in the Hat---on second thought DON'T). Not much else to say. Movie felt long and I don't think I'll ever feel the need to watch it again
While some are calling it visionary or ironic (I wish people would look that word up in a dictionary and see it DOESN'T mean coincidence), that isn't enough to make this a good movie. I'll agree it is somewhat eerie that the plot line does involve a terrorist attack on NYC 3 years prior to the saddest day in US history. Denzel has turned into a pompous overacting smug character in all his movies. Way over the top here like he was in Crimson Tide. I did like his chemistry with Monk and thought they did the partner thing pretty well. What was it with Bruce Willis and the phase he went through for a few years there where he had to be in the military in all his flicks? It did make me stop and think each time they showed the World Trade Center in this movie. Just makes we wonder why. WHY?
There are a lot of known names in the cast of Speechless, including a reunion of Beetlejuice stars Geena Davis and Michael Keaton with Christopher Reeve just prior to his horse-riding accident. All this star power leads to a lot of fizzle unfortunately. Geena Davis and Michael Keaton are great actors but I just could not believe their connection here. They meet, they get the hots for each other, they bicker, they steal from each other then backstab, then fall in love? Right. Both candidates for senator are on the take? Geena will fix everything. With no political background she is going to run for Senator from Rhode Island. Oh well, I'll say it wasn't horrible but there are better ways to spend your time.
It is probably not too often in a grouping of two women that Demi Moore takes the backseat but here is one of those rare times. Her character's part is completely glossed over in favor of her best friend Jennifer. Speaking of Jennifer(Michelle Johnson), I think I know why she got this part. It sure wasn't her acting. That ranks on the level of Tanya Roberts in A View to a Kill. Apart from her, I think the movie was extremely well acted and there is enough of a story here to entertain. Even the little plot twist at the end when Matthew, Victor, and Karen are all reunited to all find out that Matthew is not the only guilty part in the friendship. Like I said, there is enough of a story here to keep you interested but the movie's strength lies in it's visuals. True there are tons of young people running around scantily clad, but the scenery of beautiful Rio is heavily emphasized as well it should be. Simply stunning.
This flick was pure cheese. I can't believe Ebert gave it a B. How in the heck did they get Fish to do this? My favorite part has to be the final chase scene where they wreck the vehicle and then all of a sudden they are in this large forest. Having grown up in Detroit my whole life, I had to laugh out loud. A forest--downtown HA! What do they think we have Central Park? It just culminated the cheese factor.
Sure the credits bill Laurence Olivier as the star of this movie, but I beg to differ. Without Diane Lane's rookie performance, this movie would have nothing. She was magnificent as the brilliant adolescent who is so respectful/demure that she does not openly flaunt it. Her on-screen chemistry with Daniel plays nicely and is believable giving her detest for her mother's "wandering eyes". I liken their trip to Venice to profess their eternal love to the parallel story lines of An Affair to Remember and Sleepless in Seattle of having to get to the Empire State Building on Valentines Day. With the motivation and desire to seal their love, the two children with Olivier's help seem like they could accomplish anything.
While attempting to stay up all night to adjust myself to working nights at work, I saw this on cable and figured I would give it a shot since both Tim Robbins (Shawshank Redemption,Bull Durham) and John Cusack (One Crazy Summer, Better Off Dead, The Sure Thing, Grosse Pointe Blank) have been in some of my favorite movies. Their careers were both heading in different directions at this point in 1988 since most of Cusack's hits had already happened and Robbins' (previous credit Howard the Duck) star had recently risen with the release of Bull Durham earlier that year. Even with that kind of star power, this movie managed to make only $129,000. I know why. It was pretty bad. Tim Robbins was 30 years old when this was released. Half the endearment of Cusack in these parts is that he is believable as the young angst-driven teen who is coming of age before your eyes. He STILL looks like he could pull it off. Anyway, the story here is extemely thin and the infusion of their passion for soul music with the desire to be rock video legends befuddled me. In conclusion, I struggled to stay awake.
While the movie was still enjoyable, this was a major step in the wrong direction for the series. The gaping plot holes and the non-existent chemistry between Orlando Bloom and Keira Knightley were glaring. The two lovers who were separated right before their wedding and had been apart for quite some time reunite and show all the passion of a wet noodle. The kiss between Elizabeth and Jack showed more energy than the two love birds ever did. The cannibal island was a blatant ripoff of C3PO and the Ewoks(and that's not a good thing). The entire story line of the sequence paralleled Endor. I did like the character of Davy Jones and his special effects were well done. Would have liked to see a little more development of how he and Jack had crossed paths thirteen years ago, but hopefully that will be included in the third installment which you know is coming since the ending slapped you in the face with it, really liked the hard ending.
As much as I hate to admit it, they got me. Didn't see it coming. Will leave it at that so this doesn't become a plot spoiler. I thought the acting was fair and kind of sporadic. Ed Norton at times seemed a little too stiff. I know he was trying to portray a stoic magician but the only other turn of the century illusionist I know is Harry Houdini and I've seen footage of him performing, and he was nothing like that for all those who say Ed was acting appropriate for the time period. However, he is believable which is all you can ask. Paul Giamatti steals the show. His performance was solid, and you can feel the trichotomy in him between his allegiance to the prince and his duty as chief inspector and the burning curiosity to know how the tricks are performed. This movie is very entertaining and I do recommend it.
Not sure why everyone is getting giddy over this flick. Sure it was cool that they break into a bank and get away with it using fake guns and a fake execution. To me the movie never answers the Why to a level I need. Sure the mean banker fella acquired some wealth in disgusting fashion during World War 2. But this Rabbi I am assuming funded the mission to reposses these items is any better off as man of God for doing the right thing to break into the bank and put these innocent people through this? Does he have a personal vendetta against the bank owner? Jodie Foster WHY? She is unbelievably talented but her character here just seems so out of place. I'm not sure what a "power broker" is but I sure don't picture it as someone who can walk up to every corporate official in the city of New York and call in a favor or seven. Very confused by her portrayal of the character or most likely the director's reason for doing this. And what is in the envelope? Why does everyone rate this so high
Even though most of the best parts of this movie had been given up in the previews, I had a smile on my face the whole time. I think they combined the best parts of Frank the Tank with Ron Burgundy and came up with one great NASCAR driver. I don't think they left one element out in their pursuit of mocking all things NASCAR. We had trophy wives, dim-wit pit crew members, ridiculous masculinity showings, fear of homosexuals, love of Southern Rock, and of course, my favorite, the obligatory Dale Earnhardt (dead one) reference. It was quick and just a cutout on the fence, but you knew it HAD to be there. Ali G completely steals the show in this movie. Little weird seeing a Frenchman not run at the first sign of conflict but he really delivered the goods. The scene where he introduced his husband and the disgusted appalled response of the NASCROWD was priceless. Loved the reference to Highlander winning the Oscar for "Best Movie of All-Time". Whether you love NASCAR or love making fun of it, this movie has plenty of laughs for all. Check it out, I'm sure you'll enjoy.
I completely understand why they could not just do a complete retread of the 80's TV show and make it into a good movie. I do not understand why anyone would think that this was a viable option as an update. Colin Farrel was awful. His mullet was the most entertaining thing in this movie. The story was paper thin. The special effects were not up to par. It's called Miami Vice and only about a third of the movie takes place in Miami? I just don't get it. This was horrible.
