I’m four episodes in and quite frankly, I don’t see this show getting any better. At least Wandavision picked up after the third episode. Those people saying this is the best MCU show so far must be on crack.
UPDATE:
Now that I've finished watching all the episodes, I still feel a bit shortchanged with this show. I do think Oscar Isaacs did an incredible job all through the season, but I still feel it's terribly paced. Even though the last episode was awesome, I had already lost much of the initial interest. Ethan Hawke's character falls flat for me. Marvel films have created great villains with powerful motivations to justify what they do. Damn! I still think Thanos had a very good point! If Hawke was supposed to be Marc/Steven's foil, he came across as a bland bad guy who wanted to be bad because Khonshu is a trickster god who lied to him (we still don't know exactly how). Had his history arc been developed thoroughly, it would've opened more complex layers in the story. Also, they boast they got an Egyptian director who knew his way around Egyptian mythology... but... the show was quite lacklustre on that regards as well, IMO. Now we're left with a cliffhanger that hints at a second season. Oh my...
So, I caught "All of Us Strangers" over the weekend - Andrew Haigh's latest. And man, it's like everyone's been talking about this one. The whole vibe of the film, the way it looks and feels, it's just... there's something about it. And Andrew Scott, I mean, come on, the guy's a genius. From his days as Moriarty to now, he just nails it every time.
But, okay, here's the thing. The whole storyline with the protagonist's parents being gone from the get-go... it kind of just set this tone, you know? Like, you could see where it was headed, and it sort of took the wind out of the sails for me. Even when Paul Mescal's character took that dark turn, I wasn't shocked. It felt like the movie was laying it on thick with the whole trauma angle, without giving us that light at the end of the tunnel kind of vibe.
Now, don't get me wrong, the acting across the board was top-notch. Critics have been saying the same, pointing out how everyone in this film just brings their A-game, making these really intense emotions feel super real. And the whole thing about Adam trying to connect with his past, with his parents, I get that it's deep, it's moving. But for me, it was like, where's the hope, you know? After everything, you kind of want to see a glimmer of something good on the horizon.
So, yeah, it's a beautiful film, no doubt. The colors, the shots, the performances, especially Scott – it's all there. But by the end, I was left feeling a bit... I don't know, empty? Like we went through all these emotions, but for what?
Rating it? I'd say a solid 6 out of 10. It's worth watching for the performances alone, and there's definitely something haunting about it that sticks with you. But just be ready for that heavy vibe, without much to lift you up by the end.
I’m about 15 minutes in and the main character is ANNOYINGLY unlucky… I’ll keep posting.
Haven't read the book (or books) but if they're remotely similar to this movie, then the author should consider retiring. The story has all the tropes you would expect from a CW show (including the terrible CGI). Obnoxious characters, bad acting, obvious references to the HP saga... I could only watch for like 30 minutes and its runtime still had two more hours! No way, Jose. Charlize... Girl! What did you see in this script?
I haven’t read the source material. I didn’t even know it was based on a novel until I read it in the opening credits. That said, I can’t make any comparisons, but if the novel is at least 50% the same as the movie, then it’s a waste of time.
Although I find interesting the premise of a planet whose atmosphere (or magnetic field) has that effect on all males species, I think it was poorly executed. I’m a linguist and I feel that the writers have no idea what cognitive science says about Steven Pinker’s “Mentalese”. The human brain doesn’t work with a specific language and the visible effect would probably be more abstract, with more images and fewer words. Also, given that Todd grew up in the planet, it’s only natural that he would become a freaking expert on how to control his noise and use it in the most creative ways, pretty much as the Mayor. After all, it’s nothing more than an extension of your way of expressing yourself. It’s just clumsy and lazy writing… the possibilities are endless. What I get is that the noise is gone when they speak, as if the brain stops thinking when they speak.
Instead, we get a story that doesn’t even explore what it shows. What about the native species? It leaves you with nothing.
I don’t know… it’s just a very lazy movie.
I saw this in a private screening thanks to Warner Spain. I believe this is an improvement to the previous installment of the franchise. Just so everybody knows, it has all the elements and characters to give you the feel that it’s a sequel without being a sequel. James Gunn took what worked in SQ and gave it more color. Think of this film as the over-the-top violence that you’ve always wanted to see in Guardians of the Galaxy. It’s got comedy, blood, jokes, and the chemistry between the characters is fantastic. Each one has their moment to shine and show their skills.
My least favorite character was Harley, maybe because there wasn’t much development or that her scenes were a bit shoehorned. The music was quite inconsistent, I know it’s a Gunn trademark but with Guardians there’s more consistency and coherence.
John Cena’s Peacemaker has some hilarious moments, as well as King Shark… they were my favorites.
The movie is quite enjoyable and the action is a visual feast with all the graphic violence you’d expect from the Suicide Squad.
Just watched Atlas on Netflix, and while Jennifer Lopez did her best with the material, the film fell short in several areas. The plot leans heavily on the outdated “AI as the enemy” trope, much like the old Cyberdyne Systems/Skynet narrative, without bringing anything new to the table.
One of my biggest issues was the cringeworthy interactions between J-Lo’s character, Atlas, and her AI companion, Smith. Instead of sophisticated mental exchanges that could illustrate a seamless human-AI integration, we got overly explanatory dialogue that detracted from the film’s potential.
Atlas’s character was also a bit off. For someone with a deep distrust of AI and a high level of intelligence, she was portrayed as overly emotional and sociable. A more reserved, introspective portrayal, similar to Antonia Scott from Juan Gómez-Jurado’s novels, would have made her character more believable and compelling.
The film missed a significant opportunity to explore deeper themes, like the ethical and existential implications of integrating AI into human biology. Instead, it settled for a straightforward plot without delving into the potential awe and fear that advanced AI brings to our current era.
Critics have pointed out that Atlas struggles under the weight of a script that feels artificially intelligent rather than genuinely clever. It fails to capture the complex and nuanced discussions about AI that are so relevant today. For a more thought-provoking take on AI, I recommend Sam Harris’s TED talk, “Can we build AI without losing control over it?” It offers insights that the film could have explored but didn’t.
In 2024, we need sci-fi films that trust their audience’s intelligence and show, rather than tell, the complexities of AI. Let’s hope future films rise to the challenge and bring the innovative storytelling this genre deserves.
Netflix has become a sort of refuge for animation styles that major studios no longer bring to theaters. They’ve given us gems like 'Apollo 10 1/2,' 'The Cat Burglar,' and 'Klaus.' But despite these hits, 'The Sea Beast' ends up being a letdown.
Visually, 'The Sea Beast' is stunning, with some of the year's most beautiful imagery. The monsters are charming, the ocean is gorgeously animated, and it captures a sense of wonder and adventure. It makes you want to join the characters on their journey. However, the story feels like a mix of 'Moby Dick' and 'How to Train Your Dragon,' making it predictable and slow at times.
The film excels in its action scenes, which are thrilling and reminiscent of 'Pirates of the Caribbean.' Director Chris Williams, known for 'Moana' and 'Big Hero 6,' skillfully balances action and visual appeal. But unlike what you might expect, this isn’t a comedy-driven adventure. It’s more serious, with characters dealing with trauma and loss.
Rather than rushing through a familiar story, the film takes its time to explore its world and characters. Most of the movie focuses on epic sea battles, government conspiracies, and a revenge plot. Although it borrows heavily from 'How to Train Your Dragon,' it manages to feel fresh by diving into the emotional journeys of its characters.
Interestingly, the film also touches on modern issues like fake news and propaganda, which is unusual for a children's movie. While it has plenty of cute monsters and fun moments, it sometimes feels torn between being a serious film about rebellion and growth and a lighthearted one designed to sell plush toys.
In the end, 'The Sea Beast' aims high but doesn’t fully deliver. It’s not a bad movie, and it looks incredible, but its derivative plot holds it back. Despite impressive battle scenes and well-developed characters, the overall story leaves much to be desired.
Just watched "No One Will Save You" and I've got to say, it's a mixed bag. The film attempts a minimalist, high-tension narrative with little dialogue—a bold choice that might have aimed for a deep, contemplative vibe, but ends up feeling underwhelming.
I would surely praise it for its visual and sound design, but it struggles to connect on an emotional level. The narrative starts in medias res and doesn't provide enough backstory or character development, which makes it hard to care about Brynn's plight. As the plot unfolds, the lack of context turns what could be a compelling story into a series of repetitive and tired cat-and-mouse chase sequences. This slow-burn thriller is supposed to keep you on edge, but instead, it's a frustrating watch that fails to maintain interest or momentum.
It's not just about leaving things to the audience's imagination; it's about making them care enough to want to piece things together. Unfortunately, "No One Will Save You" doesn't quite manage to build that investment, leaving many questions unanswered—not out of a deliberate narrative choice but seeming more from a lack of depth. While the film's approach to storytelling is undoubtedly ambitious, it feels more like a missed opportunity than a thought-provoking journey.
If you're into films that heavily rely on atmospherics and can forgive a sketchy plot, give it a shot. Otherwise, it might just leave you as bewildered and detached as it left me.
Just watched this "Road House" remake, and oh boy, where do I even start? The original with Patrick Swayze was an absolute gem, right? That mix of 80s grit, charm, and Swayze's undeniable cool made it iconic. But this 2024 version with Jake Gyllenhaal... I feel they missed what made the original so special.
Gyllenhaal tries his best, sure, but the whole thing feels like it's stuck in a weird limbo between wanting to pay homage and trying to be something new, and it just doesn't gel. The action scenes, which should be the highlight, feel like they've been zapped straight out of a video game with all that CGI. Remember the raw, in-your-face brawls from the original? This one's got none of that visceral punch.
And Conor McGregor as the villain... I mean, I like the guy, but acting might not be his calling. It's like watching a tiger trying to moonwalk - amusing but ultimately you wish it would stop. His character's like a cartoon villain but without the charm.And what’s with that walk? Cringey as F.
The whole thing just feels like a missed opportunity. They had the chance to build on the original's legacy but ended up with something that's more forgettable than memorable. There's a reason classics are classics, and some shoes are just too big to fill, I guess.
I need to take something out of the way first: Eduardo Verastegui and Mel Gibson (producers) are definitely NOT on my nice list. Their religious agenda will always be too obvious, and quite honestly, I was expecting it in this film.
That said, I must admit that this film is very well done! They kept the religious bullsh*t to the bare minimum. What matters here is the story and the performances, which I can say are STELLAR! The movie was made to BREAK… YOUR… HEART.
It’s sad yet full of hope. And the kids did an amazing job. My kudos to them! Seeing their eyes filled with such innocence and sadness was gut wrenching.
Seriously, everyone must go to the theater and see this film.
Just wrapped up watching "Ballerina (2023)," and I've got some mixed vibes. The film hooked me in with its action sequences - they're tight, brutal, and every punch lands with a crunch that's oddly satisfying. The protagonist is a petite powerhouse who holds nothing back, reminding me of a more human Jane Wick. Her quest for vengeance, fueled by a heart-wrenching backstory with her ballerina friend, adds a touch of emotional gravitas to the bullet ballet.
However, the pace hits a slow-mo button in-between the action, making me wish for a fast-forward option. I craved more insight into her past life as a bodyguard or hired gun. Despite a 90-minute runtime, it felt like there was room for some character depth that went unexplored.
The flashbacks create a nice rhythm between the past and present, but I found myself wanting more from the non-action scenes. I'm landing on a 7 out of 10 for this one - the fight choreography is a show-stealer, but the slower sequences could use a kick of adrenaline.
Denzel Washington is just killing it as Robert McCall. That man could read the phonebook and still be captivating, but here he's upping the ante with every fight scene. I didn't think it was possible, but the brutality level actually went up a notch, and I was all in for it!
The pacing had its slow moments, sure, but it wasn't a buzzkill for me. It's like savoring a fine wine before you get to the fireworks; you appreciate the explosions even more when they come. Plus, the total running time felt just right, you know? Kept everything on an even keel.
And let's talk about Dakota Fanning! Loved how her role wrapped up in this installment. It felt like the story threads finally wove together into this complete tapestry. Kinda gave me that "Aha! So that's where it was going!" moment, and I live for that in a trilogy.
The cinematography? Spot-on. Very slick shots, it all pulled me deeper into McCall's world. And those fight scenes—they were few, yes, but, come on! It's like watching a dance, if that dance could incapacitate you in five seconds flat.
So, yeah, I had an awesome time with this one. It's like the film grabbed me by the collar and didn't let go until the credits rolled. If this is how they're closing out the trilogy, then bravo! They stuck the landing, 100%
So, I dove into "Barbie" expecting some fun, flashy visuals and, well, it didn't disappoint on that front. The start was pretty solid, with all the glitz and glam you'd expect from a Barbie world. They even threw in some cool messages about loving yourself and all that jazz. But then, things got... weird. The movie started going on this whole "women rule, men drool" vibe, which kinda felt like they missed the mark on the whole equality thing.
Greta Gerwig seemed like she was trying to juggle a million things at once. It's like she wanted to wink at the audience every two minutes, saying, "See what I did there?" Margot Robbie as Barbie was cool and all, but Ryan Gosling as Ken? He stole the show. Dude was hilarious!
The visuals? Top-notch. The music? Catchy as heck. But the story? Kinda felt like they were trying to please everyone and ended up pleasing no one. It's like they wanted to make a point, but then they'd immediately backtrack, probably scared of stepping on toes.
The movie was a bit of a bummer for me. It had its moments, but also left me scratching my head a few times. If you're in for some laughs and eye candy, give it a go. Just don't expect a clear message by the end.
After watching the 2023 version of Disney's "The Little Mermaid," I feel like I've dived into shallow waters of disappointment. While Halle Bailey undoubtedly shines with her talent, the film fails to capture the essence of the beloved classic.
The dark lighting, seemingly aiming for "realism," only manages to dull the vibrant and colorful underwater world of Ariel. And let's not even get started on the CGI, which often feels subpar and detracts from the immersion. It was just AWFUL.
Melissa McCarthy's performance, which I had high hopes for, unfortunately, fell flat. It lacked the depth and charisma one would expect from such a seasoned actress, especially in a role as iconic as Ursula.
Why the decision to introduce unnecessary political and family subplots? Sacrificing iconic moments, like the hilarious chase scene with the Chef and Sebastian, for narratives that don't enrich the core story was a misstep. That scene in the original was a guaranteed laugh, and its absence is deeply felt.
Moreover, the film's geographical setting is puzzling. The Caribbean? While celebrating cultural and racial diversity is commendable, the choice of a "kingdom" with a medieval-looking castle on a Caribbean island feels out of place. I'm left wondering what role this setting plays in the narrative, and I feel a missed opportunity to delve deeper into the rich Caribbean culture.
Despite being touted as revolutionary, especially with the inclusion of a Black princess, the film doesn't bring anything new to the table. It feels like another attempt by Disney to revive their classics without truly grasping what made them special in the first place.
In short, if you're seeking the magic and simplicity of "The Little Mermaid," I'd recommend revisiting the 1989 version. This new adaptation, unfortunately, doesn't measure up to the cherished memories of the original.
If you enjoy a languid two hours of Keanu Reeves relentlessly punctuating his enemies with a bewildering variety of firearms, then “John Wick 4” might just be your idea of cinematic nirvana. But for the rest of us mere mortals, it’s more like being held captive at a party where the only entertainment is the sound of a leaky faucet.
For starters, the killing scenes seem longer than a winter in Siberia, and I found myself pressing the fast-forward button with such regularity that I’m concerned I might have developed a repetitive strain injury. Perhaps in the next installment, the filmmakers might consider introducing some commercial breaks, so viewers have the chance to rest their fingers. But I hope they keep their promise and this is the last JW.
And let’s talk about the villain. Have you ever tried to build a sandcastle with dry sand? That’s how solid and compelling the villain was in this movie. They had about as much threat level as a half-deflated helium balloon and as much depth as a paddling pool in a summer drought.
The biggest tease of all? The all-knowing, all-powerful High Table. With each film, they promise us more, and each time we’re left holding an empty bag of revelations. In this chapter, we still didn’t get the payoff we’ve been waiting for. The High Table seems as elusive as Bigfoot, just with more tailored Kevlar suits.
And then we come to the stunts. I’m all for suspending disbelief, but there are limits. Even the dog was pulling off moves that would make a Cirque du Soleil acrobat raise an eyebrow. Next time, I fully expect to see it juggling chainsaws while riding a unicycle on a tightrope.
All in all, “John Wick 4” has the depth of a kiddie pool and the subtlety of a sledgehammer. But if you’re a fan of endless gunfire, weak villains, and dogs that get hit by cars and come out of it unscathed, you’re in for a treat.
Is this the way a very promising story should end? After four installments, this not even disappointing… we’re way past that.
Just finished watching M3GAN, and it was an absolute letdown. The film suffers from one-dimensional characters, making it difficult to connect with their stories. The plot is disappointingly predictable, with no real twists or surprises.
M3GAN had the potential to be a thought-provoking exploration of AI dangers, but instead, it offers a superficial take on the subject. The film barely delves into the ethical and societal implications, leaving the audience wanting more.
The pacing and suspense are also subpar, making it hard to stay engaged throughout the movie. To make matters worse, the visual effects don't meet the standards set by other films in the genre.
M3GAN could have been a captivating sci-fi thriller, but it falls short in delivering a meaningful experience. A missed opportunity, indeed.
Watched the first episode and this is not for me. Too disturbing in my opinion.
Oh boy, where do I start? “Smile” is a queasy, nasty horror-melodrama from first-time feature director Parker Finn. It’s shot in a dull, blank, subdued light into which hallucinations and supernatural incursions can insinuate themselves without warning. Sosie Bacon (Kevin’s daughter) plays Dr. Rose Cotter, a consultant psychiatrist who has chosen to work in the most challenging environment possible: a hospital ER in which patients are invariably at their most violent and troubled. But let’s be real here, her acting is as convincing as a politician’s promise during an election campaign.
The movie’s influences are certainly detectable: we are admittedly close to It Follows and The Ring territory. It could have been the kind of sinister flick that follows you home, slipping through the door, up the stairs, and curling up deep inside your head, daring you to sleep. Instead, Smile feels as disposable as a candy wrapper. And let’s not forget about the dialogue. It’s as cringeworthy as a dad joke told at a funeral. In short, if you’re looking for a good horror movie to watch, keep looking. This one will leave you with nothing but disappointment and regret.
This move should’ve been called: Janet Van Dyne’s Adventures in Star Warsmania.
Quantum Physics has so many incredible theories and hypothesis that could be explored and Marvel decided to take us to some random Star Wars planet / galaxy.
The jokes weren’t even that funny.
What did I just watch? Definitely not my type of film. Boring and nonsense AF.
I went for a chronological order viewing experience. Even so, I realize that it was the right thing to do for me because I would’ve learned what happened to everybody (Pink episode) before watching the actual heist (White episode) and none of the characters really stuck up to me to really care about what happened to them. I think the concept of choosing your viewing order experience is interesting and I could watch a second season provided it’s a different story, with better character development. And please, stop forcing situations just to benefit a certain storyline, I hate it when writers make characters do “convenient”, but IMPLAUSIBLE things just for the sake of stirring drama. I can smell plot twists from a country mile when the do that.
This show should’ve had 5 episodes. It has so much added stuff that makes it go so slowly. The acting is great. Evan Peters and Niecy Nash shine above anything else, but the show gets quite boring. Sorry but I wasn’t convinced by it.
Just coming out of the Madrid premiere. Mmm… I really wanted to like it, but I’m afraid it’s messy at times and many lines are cringeworthy. There’s way too much exposition in the first act. It’s supposed to be brutal but they make the constant joke that Adam kills indiscriminately and in the end the joke gets kinda tiring. But it’s true that Dwayne Johnson was born to play Black Adam. My favorite was Doctor Fate and even Hawkman, despite his obnoxious black and white view of heroes and villains. I don’t even know why he’s the leader of the JSA. But his wings are something else!
Cyclone and Atom Smasher… a bit forgettable.
The post credit scene… it’ll make everything worthwhile.
Just finished the first season. With all the time they’ll take to bring season 2, and the mixed feelings I got from the season finale, I’m not sure if I’ll continue. I gave it a 6/10 because there are things that can be salvaged. But despite knowing very little about what happened during the first half of the Second Age, meaning that writers had quite a leeway to take their licenses, they decidedly wanted to screw up the timeline we already know. I wasn’t expecting the creation of the 3 elven rings of power so soon. Where is the storyline with Annatar? I sincerely felt robbed of seeing Sauron act as The Lord of Gifts in a possible second season. Then the destruction of Numenor in the third season, the creation of Angmar and the fall of Minas Ithil in the fourth season to finish with the Last Alliance battle in the fifth one. Dunno… I feel cheated.
I know I said in a previous comment that this show was ok, that it was quite faithful to the spirit of the comics. How...eeeeeever... this is literally going nowhere. They had to bring Matt Murdoch in the last episode (#8) to inject a little action and life. Kevin Feige is kind of losing his mojo because Moon Knight and Ms Marvel were a hot mess.
I’m into the third episode and the show is sooooo lackluster. The only Queer as Folk thing is the lesbian couple having kids and the name of the show. I give ZERO f:asterisk_symbol:ck about any of the characters. If Brody is supposed to be the reimagining of Brian Kenney, at least make him a successful medical student. The guy’s is just freaking loser who knows nothing about what he wants in life. I think I’ll just stop watching it.
It’s bad… really bad. If they’d marketed it as a comedy film, I would’ve given it like 7/10. Sorry, Sly… maybe next time.
I actually had to force myself to finish this… and it’s only 6 episodes. Not even the final battle between Ben and Anakin, and Liam Neeson’s cameo made me change my mind. I’m not going to continue.
Seriously, I can’t understand why people complain about this show. I thought the pilot was cool. Quite fun and entertaining, in the best spirit of the original comic.
