Reviews written by registered user
movieLoader

Page 1 of 9:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [Next]
83 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

It's all about the final battle, 10 August 2017
6/10

This movie would be bad if it weren't for the final battle which is actually quite epic. The whole movie is a build up to that, where we see the most bad-ass creature come alive and wreak havoc, almost unstoppable.

The final fight is good to watch, and also the main fight between Batman and Superman earlier on is good too. Apart from that, there's a few interesting scenes here and there, but it does move slowly, with a lot of fragmentation and "what's going on" scenes. I don't particularly like the mix of Batman and Superman in the one story, it doesn't seem like a good fit to me.

I can understand the negative reviews, and I would also give this less than 5, but the final fight is massive and worth the wait.

Rogue One (2016)
5 out of 7 people found the following review useful:
Not dark enough, too PC, 7 August 2017
4/10

Wanted to like it, but the political diversity agenda made me cringe too much. "Yes, girls can do it too" is the sledgehammer approach to casting. Yes we know they can do it too, stop forcing that message down our throats.

No longer is casting a merit-based recruitment, but more about the minority group you identify with.

Fully expecting the next Star Wars to have trans-gender Jedis taking the lead. Not because it makes a good story, but because it ticks politically correct boxes.

After all these years of watching Star Wars, I now want the dark side to win. We need the good guys to get smashed, it's time to take things off-road. After all, the world we live in is quite a dark place these days what with faith-based terrorism, capitalist greed, environmental devastation. We need to show the true potential of the dark side rather than squashing it under "good deeds from diversity approved roles".

Darth Vader did not appear scary or menacing. Just seemed like some actor in a suit. I actually did like the robot, K2S0 - that was the only thing I liked, and when the Death Start unleashed its weapon. Everything else was tame.

Logan (2017)
3 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
It's okay, but ordinary, not clever., 6 August 2017
5/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Bleak, depressing, and average, with occasional entertaining moments and action.

Not as good as previous X-Men movies. Writing is simple and predictable. Very early it becomes obvious the story is about how "down and out" Logan will beat the odds and save the day.

The little girl is good, and does provide some needed unique action. She's a copy in some ways of hit-girl from Kick-Ass, similar age and similar level of violence. So it's not that shocking to see.

Fight scenes were mostly about "killing anonymous bad guys" with various styles of stabbing blades through different entry points. Much like a video game, bad guys never learn that approaching a mutant with only a gun is not the best strategy, but they keep coming in a conga-line of stupidity.

Writers applied a cliché formula to most scenes and characters.

No doubt there's entertainment here, and a keen fan base will lap it up. Many will be happy enough with what's on offer. But the story is ordinary, and the deaths of both Logan and Charles are quite the anti-climax. Last scene with Logan's grave with rocks and a cross was very cheesy.

No explanation is offered for what happened to other mutants. The whole narrative is forced, designed to send off two iconic X-Men characters, (because the actors are too old). Fair enough, but a better movie could have been written to achieve this objective.

Anyone who rates this movie greater than 7 is lacking imagination, happy to take whatever is given.

In the end, it's just a movie, so who cares. It's a solid 5 or 6 out of 10.

6 out of 19 people found the following review useful:
LoL Awful Rubbish, 3 August 2017
2/10

Terrible movie in every way possible. A few funny moments but not enough to carry the film and lift it from the deep stinky hole it dug itself.

I'm surprised any studio would give the green light for this rubbish. How could they not notice how bad it was on paper? Even the look of the movie is ruined by some cheap "instagram" looking filter. Over-saturated, nasty color grading.

Over-cooked special effects approach cartoon level.

Your time spent watching this movie would be better spent watching Police Academy 6 or Crocodile Dundee 3.

It tries hard to impress by going over the top with cheesy one-liners never ceasing. Doesn't matter how deadly the situation, the comedy keeps rolling. The problem with that is it pushes any sense of reality out the window and becomes a rolling berg of 'who-gives-a-toss'.

The "stupid guy" Kevin character was overdone, as was every other character. Truly awful writing. As mentioned, there were a couple of funny moments in the beginning, but they faded away and all that remains is a huge pile of steaming crap.

Passengers (2016/I)
Great ship design, enjoyable flick, 1 August 2017
7/10

I expected a bad movie but was surprised. The ship is well done, excellent production quality with nice effects. The pace moves along sufficiently to avoid boredom while providing enough contemplative moments.

I enjoyed the lack of people. It provided a spacious atmosphere for the story to unfold. With any futuristic "romance" movie, there's always unlikely flaws related to technology and science, but for the most part it's not too bad, and certainly doesn't do worse than any other sci-fi movie.

I get the feeling a lot of work was done on the design of the ship including the exterior and power generation. This deserves to be applauded, as the ship has a first class, highly evolved appearance. I really hope we humans build something like this in the future.

I like it when a movie makes me think about the realistic potential of space travel and how it would work. This movie encourages such pondering, and on the whole is well done.

Sure, there's plenty to question in terms of how likely this or that element is, but you can literally do that in any movie.

Inferior to previous Star Trek, 31 July 2017
3/10

Into Darkness is light years ahead of Beyond. Something about this new one is very shallow, empty, forgettable.

It had potential, but lost its way with seemingly a mission to tick boxes. When movies are made by teams of producers wanting to tap into "contemporary issues" and "familiar political values" we end up with mediocrity. Combined with pathetic attempts to reinforce Star Trek values with cheesy one-liners, it's all so tired and dull.

Apart from an overly simplistic narrative lacking grit, there's basic camera issues. Cinematography is too cramped, shots too tight and many scenes too chaotic. As a viewer, I want to see what's happening, not be thrown around and given flashes of jumbled visuals. When directors do this they're hiding a flawed movie.

Where are the good cinematographers? Use wide angle lenses, and keep the camera steady. Stop being pretentious. Tone down the hyperactive editing and give us a good story, not a good CGI show-reel.

Read the book, don't watch this, 9 June 2017
2/10

Whatever you do, read the book and avoid this. The whole brilliance and magic of the book is completely lost in this movie. Not only that, but the casting is not great. Dean Moriarty in particular is very hollow, very forced.

No doubt the people who made this film are fans of the book, but the book is where this story lives, not the screen. The translation to screen is very flat and dull.

The book is an excellent read. The flow and style of the words is fun, and you feel like you're riding along with their adventures. This movie however, shares none of the charm even though it tries hard.

"Legion" (2017)
12 out of 16 people found the following review useful:
Expensive wrapping paper, no substance, 7 June 2017
3/10

This is one of those shows that tries desperately to give the impression of genuine story and authentic significance, but misses the mark by a wide margin.

It's all so shallow and meaningless, yet at every turn it tries hard to express meaning and depth. I can imagine those who enjoy shiny objects dazzling on the screen without coherent explanation, may find this appealing.

I gave it a chance, but after 5 episodes I'm done. Looks like quite a budget was spent, which is sad because the end result has no heart. There's no grit... everything is surface rendered. Wrapping paper for an empty box.

I am baffled by some of the good reviews, and can only imagine a legion of fake reviewers is responsible.

3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Final Season Review - Disappointing, 6 June 2017
4/10

Disappointing final season. It's obvious they never had a solid story figured out beyond season 2. Can't blame them, there's only so many places the story could have gone without flogging a dead horse, such as "what did Kevin do now".

First two seasons were excellent, 8 out of 10. Final season not good.

Second season should have just had 2 or 3 more episodes to wrap things up after Kevin clobbered the cop. That should have been when everything was exposed and unraveled.

It's very scrappy and messy, just a multi-episode hangover from events in season 2. It lost its charm, character and originality of the first two seasons.

It's bizarre how Meg just disappears mid-way through... almost like she had other acting commitments so they had to write her out.

Kevin getting shot by the coroner - that whole scene was bizarre, and the idea very unrealistic. Was it the same writers as before? Maybe less money went into the production.

"When is it going to end" is the tag-line said by Danny the ghost. Indeed, I think maybe finally it has ended.

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Honest filmmaking and incredible wide angle cinematic detail, 5 May 2017
10/10

Smooth camera-work, long takes, wide angle, natural light, great cast and costumes. The story takes us on a journey and puts us right there in the harsh conditions.

In full HD on a nicely calibrated display, you are in for a treat.

I love it when cinema isn't pretentious. The camera isn't hiding anything, it's simply showing the scene and background as it exists.

This movie achieves a direct signal to the viewer. Uncontaminated, unfiltered, very few gimmicks, genuine and poetic.

The only part I felt went a bit too far into fiction territory was the horse over the cliff scene. A bit too Hollywood, but forgivable.

Everyone involved in making this film are very lucky to be part of such a special motion picture.


Page 1 of 9:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [Next]