Change Your Image
Upload An Image
Crop And Save
Decent satisfying film
I don't get the critic reviews for this film. I went into it expecting to be disappointed and I was pleasantly surprised. No it's not the same Robocop but who wants the same film. And I think critics are too involved in reviewing this in comparison to the first film(which was excellent) than it's own film.
A stellar cast, corporate greed, a bit of social commentary, makes this film a decent reboot. And the cast is stellar. My favorite I think was Michael Keaton and the team of people working with him. Healy, Ehle, Oldman were all great and all seemed to be having a lot of fun as was Samuel Jackson.
I thought the weakest part of the film was the family aspect. I get that they used Murphy's wife and son to bring back his humanity, but they really didn't give us enough time to get to know them for that aspect to be as effective as it could have. That's one area I feel the original was much stronger with, is they used Alex's partner and that really seemed to work.
Overall a very solid film and worth seeing. Don't listen to the critics who are blasting this. It's entertaining and an enjoyable ride.
Love, Marilyn (2012)
Interesting Picture of Marilyn
I was surprised at how much I enjoyed this and I am no huge Marilyn Monroe fan or anyone who has followed the thousand plus books, films, or articles on her or her career.
What we saw here was an incredibly bright talent and what appeared to be a sensitive and smart woman who was perhaps too sensitive for her own good.
I learned that she wanted to be a better actress. She worked hard to improve herself when she was first signed to the studio and then she studied with the famous Actors Studio with Lee Strasberg in NYC during the time of her contract dispute, a year, something I never knew. She battled with the studio for some control over her career and projects and she won. Had she lived, as she had just signed a new contract with the studio, who knows where her career might have gone. She was far more than what I thought.
Her marriages were also made of tragedy. Both men seemed to love her but seemed very controlling and Miller in particular seemed to consider her inferior to him. DiMaggio I felt seemed to adore her and want to take care of her, respected her, but hated the notoriety her fame brought and didn't want her to continue with her career. It's interesting he told her after her divorce how much he still loved her but if he were in her shoes, he would have divorced him also.
I didn't mind the other actors brought in to read her words, in some cases I thought it helped(Viola Davis, Paul Giamatti, Jennifer Ehle, Marissa Tomei, F. Murray Abraham). Others like Uma Thurman, Glenn Close, Ellen Burstyn were kind of a waste. But the high point was seeing the old footage, some of the old clips of interviews of people like Jack Lemmon, Arthur Miller, Billy Wilder, and company. I think having Amy Greene(?) her old friend part of this really added a lot.
Definitely worth a look even if you're not a Marilyn Monroe fanatic.
Visually Stunning and Cutting Edge CGI but no characters or plot worth a darn
I will give Cameron credit for a visually stunning movie. I will say this movie did hold my attention for about an hour. But special effects and great CGI only carries you so far.
OK first of all, I give James Cameron credit. He has surpassed all his prior films in creating a visual masterpiece. They were glorious and beautiful and he should be commended for that. You could even call the Special effects here groundbreaking. But it's sort of like looking at the Alps or Niagara Falls. While visually stunning, that's it. The rest of the film to me was a huge empty vapid wasteland, not well written and very predictable.
First of all the story. What story. I could have rented Pocahontas if I wanted to see this story. There's nothing original here. And at least Pocahontas and John Smith were real people with layers and motives that were empathetic and relatable. Who are Jake and Neytiri. I found myself not really caring about them. The story is clichéd and has been done many many many times before. I found nothing groundbreaking about it. I guess if you are a teenager you probably will love it. Me not so much.
And the acting? Who needs acting when you have CGI and CGI created characters. I fear for the future of actors.
Now I admit I am no James Cameron fan but I do admit he created something special with Titanic although watching the special effects in that movie now more than 10 years later, they are laughable. At least Titanic had a semblance of a story. So in 10 years plus how will Avatar's special effect's hold up. This should not be on any "BEst of a decade list or any top 200 film list. It won't stand the test of time. Compare this to a film like Aliens(which by the way Cameron made) which is still visually appealing, had a compelling story, well rounded characters, and fine acting and there is no comparison.
I think another reviewer hit the nail on the head. Hollywood is continually trying to come up with ways to draw movie goers to the theatres. Since many people can sit in the comfort of their home and watch films on their surround sound big screen TV's how do we get them coming to the theaters. Create films with huge special effects that are 3D where you can only experience maximum impact on the big screen.
Maybe these geniuses in Hollywood need to figure out why films like Julie and Julie, The Blind Side, Up in the Air are drawing in film goers, and these are not big special effects films. Just good films with good acting and decent stories. These are films that stand the test of time. I can watch films like Gone with the Wind, The Godfather, Aliens, time and time again and never tire of them. Avatar, Titanic, zzzzzzzzzzzz.
One last disturbing tone to this film. How soon will it be before CGI created characters take the place of real like actors. Thanks James Cameron I happen to adore actors bringing their personalities and takes on characters to a film.
And I will reiterate I am not anti James Cameron. I adored Aliens.
By the way who wrote the score and song for this film. Truly terrible.
I give this film 5 stars for the special effects. That't it.
The Twilight Saga: New Moon (2009)
I can't say enough about how terrible this movie is. I saw the first one and it was not great but charming. This is just a hodgepodge of scenes that make no sense. And the acting is terrible. None of the leads in this movie are remotely appealing.
I guess all the young teen girls find this movie great. Shows just how low standards are for a good film for younger people. Juno for example was a gem of a film with a wonderful story and great acting. This has special effects and unappealing acting and a story not even remotely interesting.
And what a terrible role model for young girls.
Girls go see the new Meryl Streep film or the Sandra Bulluck movie. Much more entertaining and enjoyable and decent acting with interesting characters.
West of Brooklyn (2008)
Who knew someone was not allowed to submit a review for one film
I saw this film over a year ago and loved it and wanted to show my support. I find it interesting that another reviewer(did you actually see the movie) took the time to research every reviewer for this movie in particular. You have something against the filmmaker or have nothing better to do with your time than bash and criticize.
I happen to be a HUGE Ronnie Marmo fan, saw the play, and loved the movie. I hope that meets with the approval of this reviewer. I don't know what else to say except I adored the film and the actors. God forbid someone actually like Ronnie and the rest of the cast. The horror of it. Perhaps the reviewer should spend their time reviewing films they really watch versus spending time criticizing what they know nothing about.