"Did you just turn Jody into the sexy bacon?"
"She's been the sexy bacon all along."
It's a charismatic little tale. I felt like the first act could have been shorter and the third act could have been longer. I liked the relationship between Robin Williams and Matt Damon but they don't meet until nearly halfway into the movie. The movie also kind of ends abruptly but you could also make the argument that was a stylistic choice.
I liked it, but it wasn't my type of movie. Some moments were funny, and it was interesting somehow. I just didn't really get what. That's why I'm not rating it, because I'm sure I missed something and didn't get something about it.
Funny thing is though, that I rated all the movies under "if you like Moonrise Kingdom, check these movies out..." with a 8 or higher.
Some movies just never age and this is one of them. No matter how many times I see this movie, it never fails to make me laugh and keep me interested. Great film from start to finish, beautifully played by both Tom Hanks and Leonardo DiCaprio.
If you’ve somehow managed to go this long without seeing it, you need to sort your shit out and watch it right now!
This is just a fun movie. The pacing is great, it's a long movie but never feels slow or too long. Great performances by DiCaprio and Hanks. One of the better Spielberg films this century.
The original title of the film is Nueve reinas.
THIS...IS....SPARTA!!!.....kick!!! Aaaarrrrrggggghhhhhh ppphhhffrrrrttt
Being a Ricky Gervais fan it pains me to say that this was pretty awful. Politically insensitive, lazily scripted, badly directed, terribly acted, this has almost no positives. I hope Gervais' return to his David Brent character in his next movie will be better than this!
Worst job of Gervais for sure. Really bad and flat with no story no oneliners no fun no nothing.
While the show did elicit a few chuckles, it was an overall disappointment. I think he lingered far too long on just about every part of the routine.
Really bad. Same routine of the last 10-15 years, nothing new. Jokes about when he was in the 60's , joke about cellphones when they came out 15 years ago.
Man I love that U knew when to retire. Do it again.
It has a few good jokes there. It will probably be funnier to older/ married people. Expected more but it is what it is.
I believe transgender people deserve to be treated equally and that's why I include them in my jokes.
This movie is dumb, not dumb fun, just dumb. Terrible dialogue, some laughably bad CGI, and worst of all it was just boring. There was a long stretch were there were no disasters. They really should of put more disasters and less people looking at computers trying to stop them. Maybe then it would of been some mindless fun.
You know it's bad when you can't switch off your brain to enjoy the mindless fun because your intelligence is being insulted at every turn.
Adam Sandler is phenomenal here. Seeing Howard failing over and over was unbearable... That last sequence got me speechless.
This movie stressed me the fuck out.
This was a loud non stop chaotic trip. There were very few breaks to catch your breath. Some people are going to hate it. Adam Sandler is terrific, it's great to see him doing something different than his normal Netflix crap. The music is trippy.
Was it necessary? No. Was it everything I had hoped for and left me even more satisfied than before with the ending of Jesse's story? Definitely. Was it amazing to see a lot of the old characters I had grown to love and watch for so long? Yes. Am I glad it was made? Abso-fucking-lutely.
It was alright. Nothing special, no real surprises, everything you can imagine that happens to Jessie after breaking bad happens. Nothing surprised me here. I'm not sure this movie needed to be made.
An unnecessary and well made epilogue for one of the best characters from Breaking Bad. Aaron Paul is great and I loved getting more time with Jesse Pinkman and some of the other characters.
As a BB fan am I glad this movie got made? I guess so.
I’m not entirely sure we needed to know this part of the story though.
Some things are better never explained.
Really funny movie. A bit crude, but still funny. Plus Jennifer Aniston... you know what I'm sayin'?
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.
It starts strong with a good chasing scene but then it just get's weird and plain boring. The basic synopsis takes the first hour and 15 minutes and then it adds some action at the end with one of the most anticlimactic endings I've ever encounter.
The real question is why the hell did the guy charge money for snacks at the white house?
Until the discovery of the box is one of the best movies I've ever seen. There was suspense and mystery. Later, it became predictable and banal.
What a great movie! It wasn't a good movie, it was a great movie.
It makes me feel like an unsophisticated swine but this was so incredibly boring. Took me 2 months to watch the first hour, maybe when I am old I'll be able to appreciate it.
