Change Your Image
Upload An Image
Crop And Save
Or Reset Your Avatar
We Bought a Zoo (2011)
Very nice film for the genre. All children and adults welcome.
Rating this film, as I do most any film I view, is based on the genre and the audience that it was targeted. Of course the film is a bit too young for me at 50+/- so I expected a light film and few upsetting moments to the characters.
Yes there are moral themes but, they couldn't offend anyone, again, it is this type of film; no conflict and a youthful cast that leads it to qualify for a "Family Film".
I knew what to expect going in and was not disappointed in any way.
If you happen to be a mature adult and count your pennies, maybe try another film, though it is a nice film.
The Iron Lady (2011)
My name is Meryl Streep: WHERE IS MY ... .... "OSCAR"!!! Bad as Mama Mia.
Of the fifteen hundred movies I have watched this year Meryl Steep has appeared in two of the bottom three percentile (ergo, 97% were better) of all of the films: first "Mama Mia", second "The Iron Lady". It is unfathomable that the academy will award an "Oscar" to an actor in such a poor film with an atrocious story and script, abhorrent directing, and lest we forget the schizophrenic editing.
"Maggie Thatcher Is Senile" should have been the title of this film. The other vignettes of her life have been so loosely connected to this central theme that is akin to walking off a cliff each time the director/editor takes us on another insane journey; simply no cohesion. Instead of focusing on an area of her life someone has decided that since Streep is in it that they can do whatever, namely, confusing chronological time lines.
So much was glossed over it was irrelevant to the film. The Falklands, her as P.M., her time being raised in Grantham, which I visited nearly every weekend during my one year stint studying economics in England, ergo, I am very familiar much of her accomplishments and failures. However, only cursory glimpses of her as an adolescent and as P.M. are delivered only to be interrupted by insane fantasies.
Basically, no time for character development or anything that grips the viewer to the story. Far too chaotic, and this viewer likes chaotic with a good story and script.
The Academy once again is proving that its selection and voting process is due for a change.
My name is Meryl Streep: WHERE IS MY ... .... "OSCAR"!!!
Highly underrated humorous film.
Watching this film again, after a few years since the last time, I was shocked to see that we users at IMDb thought so little of this film. To each his/her own, but I find this film just as enjoyable as the first time. My reviews are typically harsh and unconventional to the norm. My feelings on this film also do not follow the crowd. Simply, this is a genuinely funny film. Whereas, Murphy's roles and acting has waned over the years, this is one he can hang his hat on. De Niro, how does he morph himself into an appropriate character in most films, similar yes, but different enough to make you forget about his last film. Russo's expressions and reactions are dead on target. I have a renewed appreciation for this lady.
Many good laughs and humorous story about two implausible police partners.
Hokey theme. Predictable clichés and music ripped from others.
You have seen slices of this movie before in fifty other films. Cameron spliced together the themes, scenes, plots, dialogs, and music of many other good and not so good movies that were market researched to death in order to determine the best bits to throw at a wide audience. The new algorithms written for these focus groups gathered for this venture were sampled to the millisecond, tweaked, and averaged into this movie; that's $300MM. Can you say cliché fifty times. The music was sometimes ripped from "Band of Brothers", "Madagascar: Escape 2 Africa", etc. The Na'vi dialect was painful and mindful of Jar Jar Binks in "Star Wars 1", cute enough for the eight year old in the theaters, but to me; nails across a chalk board. Great CGI as mentioned in previous reviews for $300MM. So with some really creative accounting we have a $600MM+ movie for the all-time all-average audience of the world.
Still reading? This movie includes every hokey cliché, using every hokey thematic trick from every hokey movie in every scene. The musical score as mentioned was ripped and averaged from various movies by some programmer, I doubt a living orchestra performance was conducted. Everything in this movie has been constructed from a sampling of other movies that "worked" at a particular level.
Enough said! I think you get it. Oh, did I mention nice CGI fifty times, why not, every thing in this movie has been seen fifty times?
Movietones were better.
The five minutes of vintage Movietone clips are far better than this entire movie.
The sloppy uses of CGI, if I must insult that acronym, were sophomoric. It was difficult keeping my jaw up and my mouth closed for the perpetual perspective flaws of the CGI scenes. That doesn't kill the film. The lack of direction, poor performances by the actors, and weak production sinks this plane early in the Atlantic instead of the Pacific. Story line is one paragraph deep, nae, a fragment of a line.
I enjoy the cast typically, however, their performances were far from adequate. The movie tried to jam a world conquest and a complex personal relationship of two films into one short underdeveloped film. There was little character development, they were thrown at me without reason. I was not emotionally invested, therefore, I could care less what happened to anyone. Die/Live, Hate/Love, do not ask me to choose because I do not know these characters, and thus, do not care.
This is a Mamma Mia! of a movie, see review for reference.
Mamma Mia! (2008)
Is this a musical?!
Mostly, Meryl Streep can outshine in certain roles but, her star dims in this screech fest. The choreography may be fine for actors with talented legs but, not this group. To qualify or quantify the attempts at singing are pointless because, audible guttural emanations do not deserve it. After the first note was sung or the first toe tapped at a Broadway audition all but one performer would have heard the ubiquitous word, NEXT! Amanda Seyfried is the one that might have received a call back.
I have enjoyed attending live musicals, opera, ballet, dramatic theater, and concerts all over the earth, and I am embarrassed for the performers of this piece of Mamma Mia! The performers had little choice but to perform once tapped by their agents simply because the Grande Goddess incarnate was starring. Some of the performers must have worked out of friendship to her because, they knew she and 95% of the rest of the cast could not sing, or dance. An overpriced paycheck and a line to their resumes, both of which made most of their agents grin, in retrospect may not be fair compensation to the cast of this painful disaster.
The studio and the producers made too much money for delivering so little of anything substantive. This group's sincere desire of making something of quality for the people reminds me of every politician in D.C.: Take the money and run. This was their thinking: "Look we've got Meryl, we've got Pierce, so we can justify an expensive shoot on some gorgeous Greek island for a few months and make a wad of cash. Cha-Ching."
So, thanks to this film I have added a new phrase to my vernacular, such as: "I don't give a Mamma Mia! about Meryl Streep starring if she can't perform" and "That movie was a pile of Mamma Mia!".
I did hear some ABBA music in the background, which I enjoy, so my rating is a 3 instead of a 1. This is another film on movie review websites that has succumbed to a PR firm working into the night and and in the dark on website ratings. Come on Meryl, accept the truth, and save some money with your PR group and donate the excess. You don't need to control everything. Do you?