girngos saying that this is a remake or that the Hollywood version is better bruh, for once story was told by Latin American people from a latam perspective in Spanish not from a gringo blockbuster perspective
Americans saying that "original" was better than this one. Little do they know that "Alive" wasn't the first film about this accident. Actually, a mexican movie released in 1976 was the first one ever made and it wasn't bad at all.
Yes, this version is slow paced and with less action than previous movies, specially the american one, but technically and emotionally is way above the first two movies. J. A. Bayona goes deeper in the emotional part of each character, this time, using the real names of the survivors, besides, it was filmed in part in the same spot where the accident took place. Hey, we even have cameos of some of the survivors.
Sorry, but people saying this "remake" is bad, is just lazy people that don't like to read subtitles. This movie will be nominated for an Oscar, I can tell you that.
This is the kind of show I like the most. This probes that a millionaire budget is no needed when a well written story stands for itself. Just give it a shot; you won't regret.
im just happy that pam and eric are THRIVING!
Can't believe all of the negative comments. This was a beautifully shot, well thought out story. Everything in it had a purpose. And that final shot was the clincher. This was a story about the human spirit.
If you don’t know Mary Shelley’s true story this movie is a great way to start knowing the person behind the writer.
As all biopics it lefts a lot of stuff out and changes a bit of the biography so it can be more cinematic. If it wasn’t for the young actors you might think this movie is from the early 2000 but even though the movie lacks a bit of action and is mainly focused on the dialogues the best parts of it are left unsaid, just veiled enough so the viewer can imagine them, but without saying them out loud, that though doesn’t work as well because it’s a biopic so a trip to Wikipedia after will solve pretty much every doubt, but despite its flaws Elle Fanning’s performance makes it worth watching.
This movie is kinda old school in that it is heavily dialogue driven. So I guess that's why a lot of modern audiences don't like this. Surely don't expect a Frankenstein movie. I found it to be mostly interesting, especially the last half of the film. Elle Fanning is tremendous as usual.
Preliminary review, my final review for Season 1 is in another comment (I didn't want to just edit over this, especially with the likes on it). Very light spoilers for the first few episodes ahead.
I wanted to throw my hat in the ring and give a genuine review of the series as far as I've watched so far (I'll review it properly when I'm done with the season).
So, let's start with the Baphomet in the room (haha), and note that there is some very overt feminism in this series. As I hear, it tapers off as the series goes on, and I look forward to that, because while it is absolutely not pervasive to every corner of the series, it's a cringey part of the early episodes. I wholly support progressive movements, I am happy to see a non-binary character on the show, and Sabrina's attempts to defend said character. I wholly support Sabrina being a sassy, empowered female character who 'sticks it to the man'.
That said, constantly pointing to a plot element and going: 'This is women standing up to the patriarchy!' is unnecessary. As I said before, it's cringey. Let the work speak for itself.
That said, the series, while not a masterpiece, is interesting so far. I appreciate its willingness to broach Satanism (with all its LaVeyan trappings) and all the horror, gore, and sexuality that comes with it. When it just moves forward with the plot, and doesn't spend its time pointing out its progressiveness, it's a solid supernatural drama.
I do find Roz to be tedious. I think Harvey and Sabrina's relationship is unearned (they are way too lovey for 16 year olds with so many secrets between them, and Sabrina, so far, has been rather self-centered, while Harvey plays the devoted and doting boyfriend; feels very much like the criticisms feminists often have about the roles women play in their relationships with men in other stories). I hope that this gets approached with some maturity, instead of devolving into a mess of drama, but sadly, I feel it could easily go either way.
Ambrose is a great addition to the cast, fulfilling the morally ambiguous role that Salem played in the original (but also being properly morally ambiguous, in keeping with the dramatic tone, rather than comically so).
I'll make a proper review when I've finished with the season, but I just felt like this comment section could use a genuine review rather than the 'feminism is ruining everything!' reviews that it has mostly seen so far.
The Custody is like a circular pencil, it doesn't go anywhere and has no point. Seriously, 90 minutes of exposition for a 3-minute anticlimax!? Yes, director Xavier Legrand does a skillful job of building and maintaining a sense of dread, but faced with the banality of the story and the terrible decisions all the characters make, the dread is more related to watching this film than the film itself.
Wow... didn't expect this to be so bad. There are some beautiful backgrounds to look at here but that's about the praise this gets from me. Feels like Groening can't really progress as a writer. If maybe the leads had any chemistry then it would have been easier to get into it but as it stands I didn't even chuckle once and the jokes moreso were cringey given that fantasy setting this is supposed to takes place in.
That was the worst episode in my opinion. It wasn't actually that bad, but it lacked any suspense or surprises the previous episodes had. There was no real twist and the ending seemed a bit over the top. Also, I hated Waldo.
Ouch.
The visuals are breathtaking, as already shown by the trailers.
ScarJo is trying, you can tell that she wants this to be her new franchise.
It's edited quite nicely, it's got a (simple) story, and it's coherent.
So where did it go wrong?
One of the problems is that it takes away all of the philosophical depth from the original.
Well, that means you can still enjoy it from a simple action flick perspective, right?
Good luck with that.
This film has such a ridiculous amount of exposition, that it badly hurts the enjoyment of the film.
Many sequences consist of characters just talking to each other, and explaining the plot.
Things are definitely shown, but then the filmmakers don't think we're able to put two and two together, and hence add another explanatory scene.
As a result of that, the film doesn't take its time to develop the characters, meaning you won't care about them.
Top it off with an awful performance from Juliette Binoche, and you have your modern style over substance film.
3.5/10
Seems alot of people don't get this show.
Coming here with their comments it's cheap, below average acting, can't take the characters serious, etc ...
Well peeps this isn't a freaking serious ZOMBIE SERIE.
It's a ZOMBIE COMEDY show.
The characters arn't meant to be taken serious.
The zombies don't have to be serious. It's a goddamn comedy.
Its perfect for what it is.
TWD is a zombie show thats serious and see what that gets us? Nowhere. Every episode is just another filler in TWD.
Thats why Z-Nation is that good. cause we don't have lame drama in this show. It resolves around humour and action.
Anyone that comes here and doens't get it. Don't even bother commenting here about the quality if you don't get the show anyways.
Maybe I expected too much from this, but I found it rather dull. It was too family friendly in my opinion. They needed to make it more horror like with blood & gore scenes. The CGI on the dinosaurs looked really impressive, but other than that this movie needed more dark and heart stopping moments.
