Reviews written by registered user
|30 reviews in total|
A reviewer on May 24 said this is the worst game ever made. Huh? He was
obviously trolling. Or he was playing the Crash Bandicoot
game-within-a- game over and over. In other words, he is clueless or a
joker. Or both.
Full disclosure-- I have never played a Nathan Drake game. I played solo game.
I thought the graphics, especially the faces, were incredible. The gameplay was amazingly smooth. I said 'Wow' out loud more than once as chases transferred from game-controlled to player-controlled and back again. So smooth!
The storyline was epic.
The only reason this got a 9 instead of a 10 was the redundancy of some of the climbing and jumping. Slogging through so many of those was work instead of fun.
Every PS4 owner should play this!
My wife and I, after seeing Pete Jones pop up, simultaneously watched
seasons 1 and 4. It was pretty interesting. Pete Jones had a hard time
getting a handle on how to direct, but had a mélange of guys around him
arguing over production issues. Jason Mann had a clear vision of what
he wanted, pulled off some excellent directorial skill, and had one
producer bring her drama. If I were to hire for a small film, Pete
Jones would write the screenplay by himself, Jason Mann would only
direct, and Effie Brown would have nothing to do with the production.
The film looked nice, moved along towards where it was headed, and had some good actors. Whatever was in Jason Mann's head did not translate to an overall satisfying experience. As I write this, I'm surprised the movie is at 3.9 on IMDb. I thought it would be closer to a 5. But I have to agree with the 3.9, 3 of which go to Tom Bell and Ed Weeks. If not for them, this film would be a disaster. It's obvious the best parts of the film were ad-libs between the two male leads.
It's my opinion that Effie Brown is a racist. Her complaining about the 'lily-whiteness' (her term) and focus on black crew-members betrays her. I have no issue with blacks, and other non-whites, getting a foot in the door in Hollywood. It's obvious to me that Effie Brown made sure the crew was out-of-proportion black-versus-white-versus-the-population. Her personal agenda became an albatross around the neck of the production. If she were reading this now, her eyes would be open, with a fake, wide, rueful smile to go with it. This was not the production to bring that drama. I hope she gets stuck on Tyler Perry films.
Jason Mann may or may not learn his lesson. It is telling that HBO's head, Len Amato, said he would want time before working with Jason Mann again. It was ridiculous that Len Amato had to hand-hold the end of production (that may be why he gets paid the big bucks). Jason Mann has not earned his stripes before or after this production. His skill as a director is evident. He understands lighting, angles, background, set-up, timing, and editing. His next project should be with the condition that he only direct, and direct as he is told by the producer (and as the script dictates). He made a blunder when he stated something along the lines of, "The director gets the final say in the creative process." Noooo, that is what Woody Allen gets to say/do. The director does his/her job, and the MONEY gets to say from the outset who has the final creative say. Now, if "The Leisure Class" makes $20,000,000, then I know nothing. Somehow I think it won't.
P.S. Imagine Woody Allen in the Bruce Davison role, and whimsy instead of drama. THAT would be a Woody Allen film to see, and with the EXACT SAME script!
The 60 year-old women on IMDb who recall this as a favorite childhood memory should perhaps re-watch this from the jaded 21st century point of view, knowing that the filmmakers squeezed as much sex as they thought they could get away with in this film.
I recently watched this for the first time, and was surprised at the blatant and not-so-blatant innuendos.
The first thing that struck me was the opening scene, where director Hill got as many up-skirt panty shots as possible. If you pay attention, he does this again later. Why were panty shots needed, George?
One of the reviewers here asked about the necessity of Boothy. It was pretty obvious to me this was a closeted lesbian relationship.
Paula Prentiss wants to commit adultery, and c**k teases Henry Orient quite a bit.
Henry Orient becomes the sex fantasy of mother and daughter, with one having intercourse, and the pubescent one thinking about it to the point of tears.
The end of the movies shows the pubescent girls putting on heavy make- up, including "lipstick the color of a scarlet gash".
Now that I have all of you prudes up in arms, let me say this-- It was an enjoyable film, mostly due to Tippy Walker. She showed such promise I'm sorry she didn't get into more films.
The music and cinematography were great.
Many reviewers here say they wanted more Peter Sellers, and that he wasn't funny enough. I disagree. Just the right amount, and he was very funny, especially the accents.
I watched this movie because it got 3 1/2 stars out of 4 on Xfinity. Sorry, but it doesn't hold up that well. And denying the constant message of sex, however undertone, is simply wrong.
I am a 48 year-old guy, who is only partially geek/nerd. And I loved this movie! So much better than what I was expecting! Clever, hip, fun, visually stimulating, touching, and real yet unreal. It occurred to me while watching this that they threw the kitchen sink AND the rest of the plumbing into it. Crazy plot, too-cool-for-school characters, slapstick, modern and refreshing effects and style, a GREAT soundtrack, fast pace, dynamic scenes, and an out-of-this-world video-game-as-movie experience. Absolutely original! For those of us that get tired of the same-ol' same-ol' from Hollywood, let me say THANK YOU to those that made this! I went without my fiancée, because she WANTS the same old Hollywood crap (she wants to see 'The Switch. Ugh.). And did I mention the SOUNDTRACK! Awesome! I will buy it off iTunes tonight! It's too bad that the twenty-something's that this movie caters to can't appreciate this film enough. They are so jaded that they EXPECT stuff like this. They have no clue how rare this gem is.
Because I had heard so much buzz about the film, I tried to not learn
anything more. That helped, because as I watched the film, I didn't
know where it was heading, and got nice surprise after surprise.
It's a shame that other writers, producers, and directors can't have visions like this. They spew out the same 'Transformers' and 'GI Joe' crap year after year, thinking CGI and explosions makes a good film.
Don't get me wrong-- 'District 9' has plenty of explosions and CGI, but they make sense, add to the visual excitement, and feel realistic. For a tiny budget (by Hollywood standards), they pulled off something amazing.
I honestly don't know if my fiancée would like this. I decided to watch this without her, knowing I'd probably like it. It's good enough for me to see again, and maybe I'll take her (she went to see 'The Time Traveler's Wife' with a friend instead. Without even seeing it, I'll bet I can tell you the beginning, middle, and end of that movie).
'District 9' seems ready-made for a sequel: 'District 10'.
If you enjoy intelligent, witty, well-made science fiction films, and can handle some gore, this is the movie for you.
I almost gave this a 10, but that's reserved for movies like 'The
Godfather', I'm afraid.
You know what makes a great film? Something that makes you feel deeply at the end. That's real art.
Here is what this film has:
1) A great, true story that is Capraesque. 2) Excellent acting. 3) Fine direction. 4) Emotional impact.
I have watched this movie many times, and it never gets old. I love films based upon true stories in which Hollywood would have a hard time making up.
By the way, a great family film.
I tried to give this a 3. Then a 2. But really, this is an awful film.
It gets a 1. And I'm pretty generous with schlocky type movies.
I saw this as a 14 year-old, and I liked it. Now I suspect even 14 year-olds will find it corny.
The effects, acting, directing, and plot are all bad.
(I thoroughly enjoyed the recent Peter Jackson remake. I wonder if I'll laugh at that in 20 years?) Jessica Lange has bad teeth, fake boobs, an unbelievable character that spouts laugh-out-loud dialogue, and chews the scenery (which is hard to do against Kong). Go see her in 'Frances' instead.
Rick Baker walking around in a monkey suit looks like, well, a guy walking around in a gorilla suit.
The rubber hands bend as they grab Dwan (omg, even her name is funny, and listen to her explain it in the dialogue).
There is no chemistry between the two leads.
Carlo Rambaldi, the special effects guy, does much better work a few years later on 'E.T.'. His Kong stuff looks amateurish. It was a thankless, impossible task to build a 'giant robot' Kong! Lol, just typing that is funny.
Even the last shot is funny, as some goofball is waving to the camera. I'll bet to this day he is proud of that (you can see it in the upper left).
I could go on and on. This is NOT a guilty pleasure for me, as some post. This is cornball junk, and poorly-made to boot.
I looked up the top ten grossing films for 1976. King Kong is number 5. Every other film on that list is better, and that is a 'populist' decree, not critics'. 'Rocky', 'Silver Streak', 'The Omen', 'Marathon Man', 'All the President's Men', etc. Go see those.
I saw a midnight showing last night. Mostly males in their early 20's,
but about 10% gals, too. I was a fan of the graphic novel when it first
came out to show you how old I am. Two questions arise: Does it hold up
well against the graphic novel, and is it a good movie? Well, you will
never be able to live up to the graphic novel, I'm afraid. It is truly
apples and oranges. But I happen to like BOTH apples and oranges. So I
can separate the two as an original fan and a movie fan. There are
details, nuances, and depth that the movie could never get into. If you
like graphic novels, or really good books in general, you should go out
and buy Watchmen and enjoy it. I'm going to re-read it. But No, due to
the details, it doesn't hold up.
Now, how about just as a movie? It is truly an amazing achievement. It is eye-popping, it soars, it has characters you care about, and best of all, it's LONG. In a good way. The length allows you to really get into the story and characters, in much the same way the long movie 'Dark Knight' did. In fact, if you liked Dark Knight for its story, you'll definitely love Watchmen.
There will be some fanboys who will NEVER love this movie, just like its creator, Alan Moore, doesn't. Too bad for both. They are close-minded.
Superman has been re-told over and over in various forms and story lines. It hasn't hurt the overall mythology, has it? Enjoy this once-in-a-lifetime mythology. There will be no sequels or re-makes. And enjoy it on the big screen with someone who loves big blockbuster movies that are NOT Indiana Jones.
I gave it an 8 instead of a 10 because while you DO care about the characters, you simply can't care about them deeply enough, ala Slumdog Millionaire. So instead of leaving the theater with leftover roller-coaster, powerful emotions like Slumdog, you leave happy after having watched the type of big film that Hollywood, and not Bollywood, can make.
There are many comparisons to 'Rocky' in that this is a movie about a down-and-out athlete with a final chance at glory. Well, as much as Sly made a little film, it was still a Hollywood audience-pleaser. This is beyond gritty, with no qualms about leaving the audience let down. Sean Penn in 'Milk' might deserve the Oscar, but Mickey Rourke may get it. Sean Penn is an Oscar-winner, and while he is at the top of his game, he is still 'acting' in a Hollywood-type film. Mickey Rourke IS The Wrestler. This is a one-time only chance for him to win, since we are basically seeing his real life of the last 20 years play out allegorically. Since Penn has already won, Rourke may walk away with the statue. 'The Wrestler' surprised me with how it failed to pull its punches, so to speak. It was barbaric, rough, claustrophobic, and pathetic. I gave it a 7 because of the balance between Rourke's great performance, and the film's refusal to let us enjoy it. Marisa Tomei was a revelation-- her performance was difficult and fearless. I was with an audience of mostly middle-aged people who couldn't get into 'The Reader' or 'Milk' because they were sold out. The quiet at the end of the film told me they were just hit over the head with a metal folding chair, and were a bit stunned. My girlfriend had to close her eyes at some of the more brutal scenes. This is a tough-as-nails, street, gritty and grimy movie that just isn't for everyone. Thank God for films like this.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
"One of the best films in years" someone wrote at this site. Gimme a break. Okay, first of all, I WANTED to see this. I like conspiracy films, I like action films about US Presidents, and I liked the cast. In fact, I LOVED the idea of the premise: Over time, we get to see the mystery of a Presidential assassination unfold through the de-layering of the 'Vantage Points' of the stars. One problem-- the movie DOESN'T deliver on this premise. It does for a while, then suddenly deteriorates into one long, Jack Bauer-like chase and terrorist shoot-em-up. *Yawn* The direction is quick-cut ADD, typical of lousy Hollywood films today, with the director allowing these same movie stars to chew the scenery. I've never seen a worse performance by Forrest Whitaker. Dennis Quaid is no Kiefer. Sigourney Weaver is completely wasted (why did she agree to this?). The convoluted, not properly set-up typical terrorist kidnapping and shooting is dull, while it tries to be manic. I think you get my drift on this. Great idea ruined with a lazy second half and poor direction. And now my spoiler, that I MUST include, because it generated such an unintentional laugh-- At the very end of the film, with dozens of people killed, the President kidnapped by a group of terrorists, videotape and eyewitnesses galore, the movie wraps up with a serious overtone. A TV announcer somberly notes that what happened was the work of a Lone Gunman. Ha ha ha. I get it. A la JFK, folks, get it? Ha ha, um, ha. Pathetic attempt at a dramatic last line. Please. Writers, check out the first half of the film, figure out how you could have been more clever in giving us a solid payoff, and THAT is a movie I'll go see.
|Page 1 of 3:||  |